Delhi High Court Asks Jamia To Strictly Follow Regulations In PhD Admissions, Questions Holding Of ‘Deliberative Process’ After Award Of Marks For Interview

Questioning AJK Mass Communication Research Centre's action of conducting a “qualitative assessment” after declaration of results of the interview in a PhD programme, the Delhi High Court has said that it “hopes and expects” that Jamia Millia Islamia will conduct admissions strictly as per the procedure laid down under its academic ordinance and regulations.Denying relief to a candidate aggrieved by denial of admission to Ph.D. programme in AJK Mass Communication Research Centre, Justice Sanjeev Narula observed that the practice of making such deliberations after award of marks for the interview is contrary to scheme of admission process contemplated under “Ordinance No. 9 (IX), Part I of Ordinances and Regulation (Academic).”“Court is unable to appreciate why after awarding marks and announcement of results, further assessment was undertaken. Interview is the only time during the entire admission process that merit and suitability of both, candidates and their proposal, are evaluated and assessed,” the court said.The court was hearing a plea moved by Ikra Khan who was denied admission after being provisionally selected for the PhD programme. Her name was deleted in the subsequent final list. She alleged that her selection was final in all respects and the University had denied her admission arbitrarily and in violation of the Ordinance. The University issued an initial notification on August 11, 2022 containing a list of 19 provisionally selected candidates, including petitioner’s name. The candidates were required to report to office of the Director of Centre for verification or submission of documents and to collect an offer letter. The CRC held a meeting on August 23, 2022 where further deliberations were held and 11 out of 19 candidates were selected. On September 12, the petitioner visited the University to complete admission formalities. However, the same day a notification was issued publishing a list of 11 selected candidates who were recommended by the AJK MCR Centre's Research Committee (CRC) and Committee of Studies (CoS). The said notification did not contain petitioner’s name.Justice Narula noted that as per the Ordinance, comprehensive assessment of candidates of competence is to be done on the basis of the interview, where the candidates discuss their broad research interest or area through a presentation.The bench observed that the CRC could have continued with internal deliberations after conducting interviews, but not after declaration of results of the interview. “If the information presented during the interview was not adequate and only a rudimentary assessment could have been done on the basis of material presented by the candidates, then marks should not have been awarded and certainly, a list should not have been published, even so provisionally. This deliberative process which spanned over a period of time, after award of marks, is plainly irregular,” the court said. Observing that the marks were awarded based on candidate’s competence to pursue research as judged in the interview, the court said that once that was done, subsequent deliberations to ponder upon the competence is a “flawed approach” and a breach of the Ordinance.The court said since Khan progressed to the stage of interview and reached as far as the Initial Notification, she predictably assumed that admission process is complete and her selection is final. Since the language of notification asks her to complete the formalities, it does give the impression of certainty and thus she has a justifiable reason to draw such an assumption, it added.“Although the University has defended its action by pleading past practice, yet, in the opinion of Court, Initial Notification ought not have been published, as it is misleading for the candidates and to that extent Court finds this action of the University not to be in conformity with the Ordinance. There is no other provision in the Ordinance which envisages such list to be published while the admission process was still ongoing,” the court said. However, the court said the "incongruity" cannot be the sole ground to allow the petition, adding that Khan must be able to establish that she was in fact selected or demonstrate manifest irregularity or arbitrariness in the admission process. The court observed that provisionally selected candidates as per the initial notification was only tentative and not based on complete assessment of her candidature. "It has been explained that since marks for written examination were not known to CRC at the time of interview, no merit list was drawn up and no supervisor was assigned to any student. Nevertheless, the Initial Notification although provisional, was issued by CoE based on marks of the interview and written exam. Actual deliberations, as per the University, were conducted on 23rd August, 2022, wherein competence of Petitioner and other candidates to pursue proposed research was assessed and it was weighed whether a supervisor could...

Delhi High Court Asks Jamia To Strictly Follow Regulations In PhD Admissions, Questions Holding Of ‘Deliberative Process’ After Award Of Marks For Interview

Nupur Thapliyal

Tags