Delhi HC pulls up DU for allocating sets beyond sanctioned strength

In the next hearing on February 20, the university is likely to make further submissions defending its decision for allocating excess seats

The Delhi high court on Thursday pulled up Delhi University (DU) for unilaterally allocating seats to students in its affiliated colleges beyond the permitted intake or sanctioned strength, saying that such a move would result in diluting education and compromising quality.

The matter arose from a petition filed by St Stephen’s College against an order upholding DU’s policy to allocate extra seats in the initial round while granting admission to seven students belonging to non minority quota. (HT Archive)

A bench of chief justice DK Upadhyay and justice Tushar Rao Gedela expressed displeasure after DU’s counsel Rupal Mohinder submitted that the university allocated excess seats based on practice in the absence of a law.

“Prima facie, the university cannot ask colleges to admit students above the sanctioned intake. Sanctioned strength would mean the seats accorded during affiliation to the college. If you (DU) are asking them (colleges) to do so then you are diluting the education and compromising with the quality of education,” the bench said to DU’s counsel. It added, “You (DU) can’t go only by practice. Every act of a statutory body has to be backed by laws, circulars, and resolutions.”

The matter arose from a petition filed by St Stephen’s College against an order passed by the single judge, upholding DU’s policy to allocate extra seats in the initial round while granting admission to seven students belonging to non minority quota. In its ruling delivered on September 6 last year, a bench of justice Swarna Kanta Sharma had observed that the Common Seat Allocation System (CSAS), which grants DU power to allocate seats to students in the initial rounds to commence the academic session on time, was binding on all the colleges affiliated with it.

St Stephen’s plea before the division bench, argued by senior advocate Romy Chacko and Kartik Venu, painted a picture that the single judge misunderstood the intent and purpose of over-allocation of seats in the initial rounds and violated its fundamental right to administer the college by directing admission to the students.

Excess allocation policy, the plea said, was never intended to create additional seats and was only a shortcut to ultimately end up with the total number of seats. “This is only an administrative convenience and cannot create any additional vested rights for students seeking admission,” the plea said.

In the plea, the college said that the university, contrary to its undertaking regarding extra allocation and permitted intake, allocated more seats because of which the college could not admit such candidates.

On September 10, the division bench had allowed the seven students who were granted admission in St Stephen’s College to attend classes till further orders but restrained DU from allocating seats in the college.

The court would continue hearing the petition on February 20, with the university set to make further submissions defending its decision for allocating excess seats.