DUTA Press Release, 29.11.2014

The DUTA welcomes the landmark order of the High Court dated 27 November 2014 on the matter of the Special Chance. The order is a vindication of the protracted struggle waged by students for their just demand to restore the Special Chance,which was withdrawn in a most callous manner by a Registrar’s Notice of 10 October 2012. The Special Chance is a pro-student provision which enables them to complete their education even beyond the span period and vitally affects their livelihood. The DUTA urges the University to take immediate steps to implement the High Court order.

The Court has issued the following directions in para 35:

“We accordingly dispose of these appeals/writ petition:-

• (I) by directing the respondent University of Delhi to, within three months herefrom, have the aspects of, (a) need to continue with the span period; (b) whether Ordinance X-C applies to span period also, in the meeting of its Academic Council; and to pass a Resolution on both aspects giving reasons therefor;

• (II) by directing the respondent Jamia Millia Islamia University to have the matter relating to the need for having the span period and if so, the need to provide for exemption in exceptional cases therefrom, considered in its appropriate body and to pass a reasoned order thereon, within three months from today;

• (III) by directing the Secretary, Ministry of Human Resource Development, New Delhi to, in consultation with the educationist, in an appropriate fora, debate and arrive at a consensus and to lay down Policy Guideline to be followed by the Universities in the matter of the need for having a span period for completing the courses/ programmes being offered by the Universities.”

The High Court order contains extensive deliberation upon and brings forth several issues regarding span period that need to be considered through a proper academic discussion. Whatever decisions are taken must be based on arguments and counterarguments over various viewpoints and should not be based on considerations of pleasing / not displeasing the Vice-Chancellor.  Given the vitiation of the environment in the University the DUTA urges the University administration to immediately circulate the order widely. Merely convening a meeting without allowing members to apply their minds would go against the arguments made in the Court order.A decision should be taken after wide consultation and due discussion in the Academic Council of all proposals which emerge.

While disposing of 12 appeals pertaining to the provision of Special Chance to appear in examinations beyond the span period stipulated for specific degrees, the High Court of Delhi in its order dated 27 November 2014 has made several observations which reflect poorly on the manner in which decisions are being taken in the University. The DUTA has repeatedly brought to the notice of the Visitor, Hon’ble President of India, the MHRD and the UGC the ways in which the Vice-Chancellor has substituted himself for the University of Delhi, flouted the provisions of the Delhi University Act, 1922 as well as the Statutes, Ordinances and Regulations made under it, reduced the Authorities of the University, whose decisions he is required to carry out, to subordinate bodies rubber stamping his decisions and jettisoned the principle of basing decisions on free and fearless debate. It is unthinkable that in any academic institution of repute decisions are taken without responding to criticisms and differing submissions with regard to any proposal. The experience of the recent past has been that often proposals are pushed through without offering any justification and without offering any answers to various objections.

Para 29 of the order notes the following:

“As far as the University of Delhi is concerned, what we find strange is that the same Ordinance X-C (supra), for nearly 35 years, was construed/interpreted by the University itself as empowering the Academic Council to relax/grant exemption in exceptional cases vis-a-vis span period. No material has been placed before us as to what caused the change in interpretation. The ordinary rule is, for an interpretation/practice long in vogue, being not disturbed, as consistency, trust, logical and valid and fair regularity are essential elements of public law. Even the Courts are loath to depart from an established practice unless it lacks the sanction of law or is grossly erroneous.”

The present Vice-Chancellor is known to take decisions by using the provision regarding Emergency Powers on policy matters and routine matters alike. He is also infamous for getting the Academic Council and Executive Council to authorize him to take decisions which only these bodies have the powers and the responsibility to take. Recently, he got himself authorised by the Executive Council to open sealed envelopes containing recommendations of the selection committees for appointment of teachers and take decision on the matter. The Statutes unambiguously vest these duties to scrutinise the selection process on the Executive Council.

Para 30 of the order notes in the context of the decision regarding Special Chance the following:

“We are also disturbed by the fact that though the decision to grant such exemption/relaxation qua span period was of the Academic Council of the University, which we are told comprises of 200 members and who we are sure must be having rich knowledge of academics and education, the decision to do away the same is of one man only i.e. the Vice Chancellor. Certainly when 200 minds, we expect, after discussion, concluded and resolved that Ordinance X-C applies to span period  also, the change thereof by one mind does not inspire confidence. When it is doubtful whether the power to take an important decision lies with an individual or with a group, the collective wisdom is generally preferred to individual wisdom. We are of the view that it is for the Academic Council of University of Delhi to, besides taking a call as directed above, also consider this aspect. We hope when all the members of the Academic Council pool their resources/ideas and deliberate, a right answer will be reached.”

In the same para in relation to the submission made in defence of the Vice-Chancellor’s decision taken behind the back of the Academic Council, the order notes further:

“The defence of the members of the Academic Council being deemed to have ratified or concurred with the decision of the Vice Chancellor by not raising the said issue in the meetings, cannot be accepted.  The failure or pre-occupation if any of the members of the Academic Council in not taking up the matter, cannot be a substitute for a discussion on the subject.”

---