High Court Rules In Favour Of Delhi University Over Seat Matrix Dispute With St. Stephen's, Calls For 'Time Bound Solutions'
While deciding in favour of the Delhi University over the issue of seat matrix and allocation with St. Stephen's college, the Delhi High Court has called for “time bound solutions” to resolve such disputes in future.
Justice Swarana Kanta Sharma directed that in future, the colleges who have any grievances regarding seat matrix to send their grievances to the concerned authorities of the Delhi University at least three months prior to the initiation of the admission process for a new academic session.
“The representation so made will be decided by the University within two months from the date of receipt of such representation by holding meetings etc. as deemed appropriate,” the court said.
It added that such an approach will ensure that the students do not face any problem in attending their classes and such grievance resolution at an early stage will ensure that the colleges are also able to run their administration and classes without any need to run to the Court.
“The educational institutions which contribute significantly to preparing the future generations of our country, should best be administering and teaching in their educational institutions and not forced to defend their cases in the Courts, which can be ensured only by way of a simple solution finding process through timely meetings between the parties and time bound solutions,” the court said.
Justice Sharma was dealing with two pleas moved by various candidates after St. Stephen's college failing to process their applications for admission despite being meritorious and eligible.
The court ruled that the thirteen B.A. programs offered by St. Stephen's College should be treated as distinct and separate programs for the purposes of seat allocation or admission under the Christian Minority category and Unreserved category.
It rejected St. Stephen‟s College's contention that the Delhi University's policy of allocating extra students in the initial round is impermissible in law and arbitrary.
The court said that the prolonged „under process‟ status effectively blocked the petitioners' participation in subsequent allocation rounds, causing them to miss out on other potential options for securing a seat.
“This case has travelled and reached the end of the tunnel of litigation before this Court, where the petitioners were unsure of their future and admission in the college of their choice for which they have worked so hard. Fortunately, they have light at the end of this tunnel,” it added.
Title: HARGUN SINGH AHLUWALIA & ORS. v. DELHI UNIVERSITY & ORS. and other connected matter
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 981