St Stephen's Admissions : Supreme Court Dismisses DU's & UGC's Challenge To College Conducting Interviews For Minority Quota In Current Academic Year

A bench of Justices AS Bopanna and PS Narasimha was hearing the special leave petitions filed by the university as well as the UGC against an interim order of the Delhi High Court allowing the college to go ahead with its 85-15 scheme for minority students this academic session.

On the last occasion, although the hearing was adjourned at a counsel's request, Solicitor-General for India Tushar Mehta argued that interviews introduced a component of subjectivity that tended not to result in the fairest results, during the brief courtroom exchange. He also said that those seats out of the 50 percent reserved seats that were filled on the basis of interviews had virtually become 'payment seats'. Senior Advocate A Mariarputham, appearing for St Stephen's college, vehemently objected to this statement. He also informed the bench that admissions had already been made in terms of the interim order of the Delhi High Court, making the pleas infructuous. But, the bench was reluctant to entertain any argument on that day since an adjournment had been sought and directed for the matter to be re-listed on Monday, i.e., August 21 to hear the arguments.

Today, SG Mehta repeated his concerns over 'meritorious' students being left out because of the college insisting on conducting interviews or having personal interactions with applicants. He pointed out that the mandate of admitting students strictly on the basis of an all-India merit list, even to minority institutions, existed in other fields, such as the medical field. "This year, the university asked the college to admit minority students for the 50 percent reserved seats only on the basis of CUET marks. Minority institutions can definitely say they will enroll minorities, but they cannot insist on conducting interviews like this," the law officer argued.

He urged the bench to set aside the interim order of the high court and allow the admissions for this academic cycle to proceed on the basis of the scheme that Delhi University formulated. "I have taken instructions. According to my instructions, the selection process is still going on."

Senior Advocate A Mariarputham, however, objected to this. He informed the bench that the admission process for the academic year of 2023-24 was over and the list of candidates provisionally selected had already been sent to Delhi University, which had, in turn, mailed the students. The admitted candidates have paid the fees and joined the classes starting from August 16, the senior counsel said. "This was not a unilateral process."

"Have you seen these letters?" Justice Narasimha asked the solicitor-general, before adding, "When the university itself is sending these letters to students, it will be unfair to the students now to interfere."

When a counsel accused St Stephen's of completing the interview process in 'undue haste' after securing an interim order of the high court in its favour, Justice Narasimha retorted, "You should have immediately come here after the high court passed its order on July 21. Today, it is August 21."

Justice Bopanna also weighed in, saying that interfering with the high court's order while the admission process is underway would create more uncertainty. He pronounced the order on behalf of the bench - 

"In view of the fact that the order impugned here is an interim order passed by the high court in a pending writ petition and also since the high court made the admissions subject to the final outcome of the writ petitions, at this stage, we see no reason to interfere. However, considering the need for certainty in the matter, we request the high court to hear the parties' submissions and dispose of the petitions as expeditiously as possible."

Background

The controversy is over the admission policy introduced by the University of Delhi in April of last year, which mandated the marks obtained in the Common University Entrance Test as the sole eligibility criterion for admission to colleges under DU. In the last academic year, the university and its affiliated college were involved in a legal battle over this policy of admission. St Stephen’s initially insisted on following an 85-15 formula for non-Christian applicants seeking admission in its undergraduate courses – and later, for minority as well as non-minority candidates – with the result of the entrance examination holding 85 per cent weight and the interview contributing 15 per cent to the overall scores.

St Stephen’s cited its status as a minority institution to defend this policy, claiming that it could take autonomous decisions with respect to admissions. On the other hand, while Delhi University agreed to make a concession with respect to the Christian applicants and accepted the college’s plan to conduct interviews for such candidates; it was unwilling to budge on the issue relating to the admission criteria for non-minority students.

This led to the college filing a petition seeking the quashing of a May 2022 communication issued by DU, by which the university had demanded that admission to all undergraduate courses be made entirely on the basis of 2022 CUET scores. Besides this, St Stephen’s college also challenged the communication to the extent that it mandated a single merit list for admission of Christian candidates regardless of any denominations, sub-sects, or sub-categories within the community.

A bench of the Delhi High Court comprising Chief Justice Satish Chandra Sharma and Justice Subramonium Prasad quashed the communication with respect to the single merit list it mandated for all Christian candidates. But, on the issue of conducting interviews for non-minority students, the division bench directed St Stephen’s to follow the admission policy formulated for the academic year by the university, and to that effect, withdraw its admission prospectus and issue a public notice declaring the amended procedure for admission to undergraduate courses. The bench held:

“While the petitioner-college retains its authority to conduct interviews in addition to the CUET for the admission of students belonging to the minority community, it cannot devise a policy that forces the non-minority community to undergo an interview as well. Therefore, the right of the petitioner-college to conduct interviews and accord to them 15 percent weightage for the purposes of admitting students does not extend to non-minority students, and solely pertains to its minority students.”

When the matter travelled to the Supreme Court in appeal, a bench of Justices Ajay Rastogi and CT Ravikumar refused to stay the order of the Delhi High Court directing St Stephen’s college to consider only CUET scores for admission of non-minority students.

As a result of the high court directions, and the apex court’s order, St Stephen’s conducted interviews holding 15 percent weight only for minority students in the last admission cycle. However, this year, the university has made it clear that only CUET marks will be considered for admission to undergraduate and post-graduate courses and that this rule would apply to all categories of candidates, including those belonging to minority communities, leading to a second round of litigation.

Not only has St Stephen’s published its prospectus stating that the 85-15 formula will be followed for minority candidates in this academic year as well, the college has also challenged the Delhi University’s notification in a writ petition in the Delhi High Court.

After the Supreme Court clarified that the high court would be ‘at liberty’ to hear the writ petition despite the pendency of a special leave petition on related issues before it, the Delhi High Court granted interim relief to the college last month. A bench headed by the Chief Justice has directed that the admission policy as framed by it in last year’s judgment shall be followed by the university for the academic year 2023- 24.

Case Title

1. University of Delhi v. St. Stephen's College & Anr. | Special Leave Petition (Civil) No. 17344 of 2023

2. University Grants Commission v. St. Stephen's College & Anr | Special Leave Petition (Civil) No. 17715 of 2023

Click Here To Read/Download Order