The Delhi High Court on Friday reaffirmed its stance that St Stephen’s College must allow a minority category student to attend classes, amidst ongoing seat allocation disputes with Delhi University (DU). The bench, headed by Chief Justice Manmohan and Justice Tushar Rao Gedela, criticized the university’s non-compliance with its October 28 order that permitted the student’s attendance until further directives.
During the hearing, DU’s counsel presented a plea seeking to recall the court’s decision, to which the bench sternly responded: “If the contemnors think they are above the law, we will tell them they are not… We will call them here to explain their conduct. Our order may be right or wrong, but you have to comply with it.” The court emphasized that until the order is officially recalled, it must be followed.
This directive stems from a contempt petition against university officials accused of willfully ignoring the judicial order. Responding to the court’s position, DU’s counsel assured immediate compliance with the October 28 ruling, without prejudice to their rights.
The matter was brought to the high court through appeals by both the college and the student after a single judge’s decision denied the student admission. The division bench had originally permitted the student to attend classes and halted any further allocation of seats under the minority quota until a definitive ruling was made.
In the background of these appeals, the single judge’s judgment on October 14 found that 18 out of 19 students were entitled to admission on merit, leaving one seat vacant—which the appellant student claimed. The court allowed the student to attend classes temporarily, pending further orders. The student sought admission to the Bachelor of Arts course after another candidate declined the spot.
The controversy escalated as DU contested the appeals, arguing that St Stephen’s College should not “juggle” its seat matrix. The university claimed the college allocated seats based on its discretion rather than adhering to the agreed seat matrix.
Conversely, St Stephen’s defended its admission process, asserting that it stayed within the sanctioned intake limits and did not exceed permissible admissions.
