Professor Eqbal Hussain has filed an appeal with the Delhi High Court contesting a previous judgment that annulled his appointment as the Pro-Vice-Chancellor and later as the Officiating Vice-Chancellor of Jamia Millia Islamia.
Scheduled for today, Monday, May 27, the appeal will be heard by a division bench comprising Justices Rekha Palli and Saurabh Banerjee, according to a report from PTI.
The high court's single judge had invalidated Hussain's appointment as Pro-Vice-Chancellor (VC) and subsequently as Officiating VC of Jamia on May 22, ruling that the appointments did not comply with the relevant statutes.
However, the court directed that the university's academic and administrative functions must not suffer and ordered the appointment of a new officiating VC within one week. Additionally, it called upon the 'Visitor,' who is the President of India, to initiate the process of appointing a regular VC in the interim.
In its ruling on petitions by Md Shami Ahmad Ansari and others, the court issued a writ of Quo Warranto, nullifying Hussain's appointment as Pro Vice Chancellor and Officiating Vice Chancellor. The court emphasized that since Hussain's appointment did not adhere to the statute, his continuation as Vice Chancellor could not be allowed.
The controversy stemmed from Hussain's appointment as Pro VC by then VC Prof Najma Akhtar on September 14, 2023, and his subsequent assumption of the role of Officiating VC following Akhtar's retirement on November 12, 2023. Petitioners argued that both appointments violated JMI Act provisions and UGC regulations.
The court noted that according to JMI's governing laws, Hussain's appointment as Pro VC should have been approved by the Executive Council before being finalized. It further stated that in the event of disagreement, the matter should have been referred to the Visitor for resolution.
Concluding that the initial appointment was not in line with the statutes, the court deemed Hussain's subsequent appointment as Officiating VC invalid, emphasizing that there was no "emergent situation" warranting non-compliance with the statute at the time of his appointment.
