Allahabad High Court Rejects Pleas Challenging Appointment Of First Woman VC Of Aligarh Muslim University

The Allahabad High Court has upheld the appointment of Professor Naima Khatoon as the first woman Vice-Chancellor of Aligarh Muslim University from the panel of names recommended by the University to a Visitor.The bench of Justice Ashwani Kumar Mishra and Justice Donadi Ramesh observed that “We are informed that in the history of the University for well over a century no women has ever been appointed as Vice-chancellor. Appointment of woman as Vice-Chancellor of a premier institution of higher learning sends a message that the constitutional objective of advancement of cause of women is being promoted.”The Court held that merely because the husband of Professor Naima Khatoon, who was the Vice Chancellor and had presided over the meeting of Executive Council and University Court, which included her name in the panel to be send to the Visitor, did not vitiated the entire selection proceedings.However, the Court directed that from henceforth, no spouse or close family member could preside and participate in any crucial meeting concerning his/her close relative. Professor Tariq Mansoor was the Vice-Chancellor of AMU till 2022, however, his term was extended for a period of one year or till he appointed a new VC. During his extended tenure, he appointed Professor Mohd. Gulrez as Pro-Vice-Chancellor of the University. Since, Professor Tariq Mansoor resigned, Professor Mohd. Gulrez was made the officiating Vice-Chancellor. During the tenure of Professor Mohd. Gulrez as the officiating Vice-Chancellor, Professor Naima Khatoon, his wife, was chosen as the Vice Chancellor of AMU. This appointment was challenged before the High Court on grounds of bias and manipulation as Professor Mohd. Gulrez, being the VC, participated in the proceedings for appointment of his wife as the VC. The Court observed that an election process was held wherein 33 candidates had applied out of which 20 were shortlisted by the Executive Council. There was voting by secret ballot in which Professor Faizan Mustafa received the highest votes, followed by Professor Naima Khatoon and Professor Qayyum Husain, Accordingly, these 3 candidates were shortlisted. In a second poll, Professor Muzaffar Uruj Rabbani and Professor Furqan Qamar were also shortlisted. Thereafter, in the meeting of the University Court, 3 candidates, including Professor Naima Khatoon received the highest votes and their names were forwarded to the Visitor (who takes the final call) for their consideration for appointment as Vice-Chancellor. The Court noted that despite being a member of the Executive Council, Professor Naima Khatoon had restrained from participating the proceedings for appointment of VC as she had applied as candidate for the said post. Perusing the original record of the selection process, the Court held that the second poll, though contested before the High Court, was never disputed before the Executive Committee at any stage. It held that the process could not said to be manipulated. The Court noted that Clause 27 of Chapter II of the Rules of the debate regarding appointment of VC provide that the a member who might be effected personally by any motion, favourably or adversely, shall not be entitled to vote in the process of appointment.“In the facts of the case, it was clearly desirable that Professor Gulrez Ahmad abstained from presiding the crucial Executive Council and the University Court meetings when his own wife was to be considered for recommendation for appointment. It cannot be said that a husband will not be effected personally by any motion adopted by the house concerning his wife. Even if it is so the perception of house is quite likely to be otherwise. Even if we accept the respondents argument that Professor Gulrez and Professor Naima are distinct academicians of repute, yet fairness would have been better reflected if Professor Gulrez had not presided over these meetings.”The Court held since the total number of members present and voting in the Executive Committee were more than the coram, Professor Mohd. Gulrez should have abstained from sitting and participating in the proceedings as it was improper. “We deem it appropriate, in such circumstances, to issue a directive to the University to resolve, henceforth, not to allow any spouse or close family member to preside and participate any crucial meeting concerning his/her close relative.”The Court observed that though the presence and participation of Professor Mohd. Gulrez in the Executive Committee meetings could show bias, the ultimate decision was on the Visitor who could have rejected the entire list of shortlisted candidates given to him/her by the University Court. “The scheme of appointment under the Act confers limited authority upon the Executive Council and the University Court. Its role is limited to recommending names of three persons by the University Court out of five names suggested by the Executive Council. The Executive Council and the University Court are multi member...

Allahabad High Court Rejects Pleas Challenging Appointment Of First Woman VC Of Aligarh Muslim University

Upasna Agrawal

Tags