Read Time: 07 minutes

Synopsis

The Delhi High Court ordered St. Stephen's College to follow the admission policies formed by Delhi University for the academic year 2022-2023 and directed the college to withdraw its Admission Prospectus, and accordingly, issue a Public Notice announcing the revised admission procedure.

Noting that the CUET has been implemented by DU to level the playing field and remove aberrations that have arisen due to the varying standards of evaluation of different State Boards, a division bench of Chief Justice Satish Chandra Sharma and Justice Subramonium Prasad opined that conducting an interview over and over again is unethical.

The court was hearing two petitions relating to the St. Stephen's admission policy, wherein one petition was filed by the College and sought quashing of DU’s letter dated May 9, 2022, which directed it not to conduct interviews for students seeking admission in the undergraduate courses in the non-reserved category. It also directed the college to employ a single merit list for admission of candidates belonging to the Christian community.

The other petition was filed by Konika Poddar who sought directions to the college to take admission for unreserved seats only based on marks obtained in the Common University Entrance Test (CUET).

The division bench ruled that, while the college retains the authority to conduct interviews in addition to the CUET for the admission of students from the minority community, it cannot devise a policy that requires students from the non-minority community to do so as well. As a result, the College's right to conduct interviews and give them 15% weightage in the admissions process does not extend to non-minority students, but only to minority students.

Court noted that Article 30 is not absolute and may be subjected to restrictions imposed by the State as long as the same are reasonable and do not destroy the basic character of the minority institution.

“There is no clear-cut bar that prevents the State from making guidelines/regulations, even in the case of unaided minority educational institutions. Regulations can be framed to prevent maladministration as well as for laying down standards of education, teaching, maintenance of discipline, public order, health, morality, etc.,” the court added.

The division bench concluded by stating that:

• The fundamental right under Article 30(1) accorded to a minority institution cannot be extended to non-minority members.
• Article 30(1) is not absolute and the State has the right to formulate regulations concerning the administration of a minority institution to the extent that it is for the furtherance of the interest of the minority community and is in a bid to prevent maladministration of the minority institution. Aided minority educational institutions that are affiliated with a University must follow the norms and procedures of the said University.
• Protection under Article 30(1) can be extended to the extent that it allows a minority institution to sub-classify the reservation accorded to the minority community.

Therefore, the bench directed St Stephens College to issue a new prospectus giving 100% weightage to the Common University Entrance Test (CUET) score for admission to its undergraduate courses under the non-minority category.

Accordingly, the court partly allowed and disposed of the petitions.

Case Title: St Stephen's College v. University of Delhi & Anr and Konika Poddar v. St. Stephen's College & Ors.