BBC documentary screening: Produce copy of original file, Delhi HC to DU on its decision debarring PhD student

A single judge bench of the HC had on April 27 set aside the debarment order observing that it was passed “without affording a proper opportunity of hearing” to Chugh or considering his explanation, submitted by him, and restored Chugh’s admission. Against this, the varsity approached the HC’s division bench in appeal.

A division bench of Acting Chief Justice Manmohan and Justice Mini Pushkarna on Thursday granted time to DU’s counsel to place on record a photocopy of the original file as well as the video footage related to the alleged incident. The bench, however, clarified that there was no interim order passed in the appeal. The appeal is next listed on May 9, 2024.

During the hearing, the HC asked DU’s counsel to produce the original file while asking whether the reasons for the decision taken by the varsity are found in the file.

DU’s counsel argued that it wasn’t disputed that Chugh was not only given time to reply to a show cause notice, but also called for the hearing. Only then was a decision taken, he added.

The single-judge bench was shown video footage of the alleged incident, which showed Chugh’s “complicity”, the counsel said.

Meanwhile, advocate Naman Joshi appearing for Chugh said that while there was no stay on the April 27 HC order, yet his PhD thesis has not been processed. “I’m being de facto punished,” Joshi argued.

A single judge bench of Justice Purushaindra Kumar Kaurav had observed in its order that “reasons behind any decision are necessary to be assigned by the administrative authorities”.

“From a perusal of the facts of the present case, specifically the impugned order, this court finds that the same has been passed without affording a proper opportunity of hearing to the petitioner or considering his explanation, as was submitted by him in terms of his response dated 20.02.2023. It is for this reason, this court is unable to sustain the impugned Memorandum dated 10.03.2023, therefore, the same is set aside and the admission of the petitioner is restored,” Justice Kaurav had said.

The HC had, however, said that if the University intends to take any action against Chugh it can only proceed strictly, in accordance with law and after due observance of the principles of natural justice.

DU, in its appeal, has assailed the single judge’s order claiming that it has been passed without “appreciating the video footage available” with the University, which shows that the Chugh was “actively involved in the screening of the BBC documentary with the intention to disrupt the academic functioning of the University system”.

The appeal, further, states that the Chugh’s “acts” amount to “gross indiscipline in general” and violates “Ordinance XV-B, Clause 3, Sub-Clause (i) of the Ordinances of the University of Delhi”. This provision pertains to “causing disruption in any manner of the academic functioning of the University system” and as per Ordinance XV-B of the University of Delhi Act all powers relating to discipline and disciplinary action are vested in the Vice- Chancellor of DU.

The appeal also states that the order was passed without appreciating the fact that Chugh was never denied a personal hearing. It seeks that the April 27 order of the single judge be set aside and the March 10 memorandum be upheld. In the interim, DU has sought that the single judge’s order be stayed till the varsity’s appeal is decided.