The Delhi High Court on Saturday dismissed a plea challenging the appointment of Dr. Najma Akhtar as the Vice-Chancellor of the Jamia Millia Islamia University while finding no merit in the petition the bench called the appointment of Dr. Najma as justified.
Highlighting the position of law, a single-judge bench of Justice V. Kameswar Rao noted that “ the Court can not sit in appeal over the decision taken by the Search Committee.”
The petition has been filed by M. Ehtesham-Ul-Haque an alumnus of Faculty of Law, Jamia Millia Islamia University challenging the appointment of Dr. Najma Akhtar to the post of Vice-Chancellor of the University alleging that there is a flagrant violation and total non-compliance of the statutory provisions and regulations of statute 2(1) of the Jamia Millia Islamia Act, 1988 read with clause 7.3.0 of the UGC Regulations, 2010.
Senior Advocate Kapil Sibal appearing for the petitioner submitted that the Search Committee has recommended 3 names out of the 13 shortlisted names, without giving any reason which is in violation of clause 7.3 (ii) of the UGC regulations read with statute 2(1) of the Jamia Millia Islamia Act.
Also Read: Policing digital media, OTT content
Whereas, the bench while referring to the Supreme Court Judgment in the case of the National Institute of Mental Health and Neuro Sciences noted that
“it is not necessary for a selection committee to give reasons of its conclusion unless the rule governing the appointment to a particular post stipulates so. In the case in hand, Clause 7.3 (ii) of the UGC Regulations does not contemplate reasons to be given against each name, so recommended.”
The bench while further justifying the position of law and referring to the case of R.K. Jain noted that
“the court can not sit in appeal over the decision taken by the Search Committee. Rather the scope is limited to judicial review of the decision whereby the court is only concerned with whether the incumbent possessed qualifications for the appointment and the manner in which the appointment came to be made or whether the procedure adopted was fair, just and reasonable.”