Excess Allocation Of Seats In College Won’t Only Create Burden On Limited Infrastructure But Also Impair Ability To Impart Quality Education: Delhi HC

The Delhi High Court said that excess allocation of seats in a college would not only create a burden on the limited infrastructure but would also impair the ability to impart quality education to students.

The Court said thus in an appeal filed by St. Stephen College challenging the interim order of the Single Judge by which provisional admission was granted to some persons.

A Division Bench of Acting Chief Justice Manmohan and Justice Tushar Rao Gedela observed, “This Court is further of the view that the Appellant’s argument that excessive allocation has been made by the University has not been rebutted with specificity by the University. This Court would like the University to appreciate that excess allocations of seats in a college would not only create a burden on the available limited infrastructure but would also impair the ability of the college to impart quality education to its students. Such action could also jeopardise the careers of young students.”

Advocate Romy Chacko represented the appellant while Senior Advocate Rishi Malhotra represented the respondents.

In this case, the appellant college challenged the interim order passed by the Single Judge by which it granted the respondents provisional admission in accordance with the allocation by the Delhi University (DU). The counsel for the appellant stated that the DU had instead of allocating students against the sanctioned and permitted intake, made excess allocations which according to DU were for convenience as normally all the students do not take admissions, resulting in some seats remaining vacant.

The counsel further emphasised that admission in the appellant college is much sought after and students allotted to different Programs of study in the college ordinarily accept the same and the number of vacancies after the initial allotment are very minimal or nil. It was stated that after raising protest against such policy, DU vide its e-mail agreed that excess allotment to the appellant college would be limited to 5% in each program.

The High Court after hearing the contentions of the counsel ordered, “Keeping in view the fact that the matter is listed for final hearing before the learned Single Judge, this Court disposes of the present appeal by directing the Respondents to file their counter affidavit/rejoinder affidavit within three working days. The date of hearing before the learned Single Judge is pre-poned to 4th September, 2024.”

The Court clarified that till further orders, the respondents shall be at liberty to take admission in their second preference colleges if they so desire and DU will facilitate the respondents in this process, if they so desire.

“Since the final hearing before the learned Single Judge has been expedited and with a view to balance the equities, this Court directs that till the disposal of the writ petition, the Respondents no.1 to 6 shall not attend the classes at the Appellant-college. This Court clarifies that the observations in this order are only for determination of the present appeal”, it added.

Accordingly, the High Court disposed of the appeal and left open the rights and contentions of all the parties.

Cause Title- St. Stephen College v. Hargun Singh Ahluwalia and Ors. (Neutral Citation: 2024:DHC:6589-DB)

Appearance:

Appellant: Advocates Romy Chacko, Kartik Venu, Akshat Singh, Himani Sharma, Varun Mudgal, and Sachin Dalal.

Respondents: Senior Advocate Rishi Malhotra, Advocates Ravinder Singh, Ansuiya, Raveesha Gupta, Shivansh Maini, Mohinder JS Rupal, Hardik Rupal, Sanjay Khanna, Pragya Bhushan, Karandeep Singh, and Tarandeep Singh.

Click here to read/download the Judgment