Professor Eqbal Hussain has approached the Delhi High Court to challenge a single judge’s order that annulled his appointment as Pro Vice Chancellor and subsequently as Officiating Vice Chancellor of Jamia Millia Islamia.
New Delhi: Today (May 27): Professor Eqbal Hussain has approached the Delhi High Court to challenge a single judge’s order that annulled his appointment as Pro Vice Chancellor and subsequently as Officiating Vice Chancellor of Jamia Millia Islamia.
The appeal is set for hearing on Monday before a division bench of Justices Rekha Palli and Saurabh Banerjee.
On May 22 ruling by a single judge of the High court, which quashed Hussain’s appointments. The court held that these appointments were not made in compliance with the relevant statutes governing the university.
Despite this decision, the court directed that the university’s academic and administrative functions continue uninterrupted, mandating a fresh appointment to the post of Officiating Vice Chancellor within one week.
Background
The issue began when Professor Najma Akhtar, the then Vice Chancellor of Jamia Millia Islamia, appointed Hussain as Pro Vice Chancellor on September 14, 2023. Upon Akhtar’s retirement on November 12, 2023, Hussain assumed the role of Officiating Vice Chancellor through a subsequent notification issued by the Registrar’s office.
READ ALSO: ‘3-Universities Without VCs’: HC Expresses Concern and Anguish
This sequence of events was contested by Md. Shami Ahmad Ansari and others, who argued that both appointments violated the provisions of the Jamia Millia Islamia Act and regulations issued by the University Grants Commission (UGC).
The single judge’s decision highlighted procedural lapses in Hussain’s appointment. According to the court, the nomination of Hussain for Pro Vice Chancellor by the then Vice Chancellor should have been submitted to the Executive Council for approval.
It further stated that if there was any disagreement, the issue should be referred to the Visitor, who could either override the council’s decision or send the case back to the VC to propose a new candidate.
The court found that this mandatory procedure, as outlined in Statute 4 of the University’s statutes, was not followed. Consequently, the court concluded that both Hussain’s initial appointment as Pro Vice Chancellor and his subsequent appointment as Officiating Vice Chancellor were invalid.
“A writ of Quo Warranto has been issued, nullifying the appointment of respondent no. 2 as Pro Vice Chancellor by the office order dated September 14, 2023, and as Officiating Vice Chancellor by the office order dated November 12, 2023.
“Given that respondent no. 2 was not appointed in accordance with the statute, he cannot continue in the role of officiating vice chancellor,” the court declared while addressing petitions filed by Md. Shami Ahmad Ansari and others.
“The appointment of a new Vice Chancellor or Administrator must be completed within one week from the date of receiving this order. The process to appoint a regular Vice Chancellor should begin no later than two weeks after the interim appointment and be concluded within 30 days,” the court stated.
Furthermore, the court determined that the initial appointment of Hussain as Pro Vice Chancellor violated the statutes, leading to the conclusion that his subsequent appointment as Officiating Vice Chancellor was also legally invalid.
The court emphasized that there were no exceptional circumstances at the time of Hussain’s appointment as officiating VC that warranted bypassing the statute. It noted that the impending retirement of the previous VC was well-known, and according to the statute, the senior-most professor, one of the petitioners, could have been appointed as the officiating VC.
FOLLOW US FOR MORE LEGAL UPDATES ON YOUTUBE
