|
The Delhi High Court has struck down Jamia Millia Islamia's decision to dissolve the Jamia Teachers Association (JTA) and nullify its elections, ruling that the university's actions infringed the constitutional right to association and were devoid of any lawful justification.
Justice Sachin Datta observed, "The core issue pertains to the permissible extent of interference by the University in the internal affairs of an association of teachers", and held that Jamia's actions went beyond that boundary. The court said the university's orders were "administrative in nature, bearing no rational nexus to any legitimate regulatory purpose." The case arose from Jamia's office orders and an advisory issued in November 2022, which dissolved the JTA, sealed its office, and barred its members from meetings. The university had also claimed the power to reframe the Association's constitution and regulate its functioning under the Jamia Millia Islamia Act, 1988. Rejecting this contention, the Court held that such statutory provisions cannot be interpreted to curtail constitutional freedoms. "Powers conferred by the Jamia Millia Islamia Act must operate within the bounds of the Constitution and cannot override fundamental rights guaranteed under Article 19(1)(c)," Justice Datta wrote. The judgment emphasised that the right to form an association under Article 19(1)(c) necessarily includes the right to continue and govern it according to its own constitution. Citing the Supreme Court's ruling in Damyanti Naranga v. Union of India (1971), the Court reiterated that interference with an association's composition or functioning, without satisfying the narrow grounds under Article 19(4), renders the right "ineffective and meaningless." In a pointed observation, the Court stated that "the unilateral formulation and approval of a revised Constitution for the JTA, without consultation or consent of its members, undermines the autonomy of the Association and violates the right to self-governance." The bench also referred to earlier precedents to reaffirm that freedom of association cannot be subjected to administrative discretion or prior restraint. "Guaranteed freedoms cannot be abridged by official discretion," the Court quoted. Disagreeing with Jamia's argument that the JTA's Constitution made it subject to university control, the Court clarified that such a reference merely acknowledged the statutory setting in which the body was formed and did not amount to subordination. Concluding that Jamia's actions were unconstitutional and unsustainable, the High Court quashed the office orders dated November 17 and 18, 2022, and the advisory of November 18, 2022. The petition filed by the Jamia Teachers Association was accordingly allowed and disposed of, said the court. (ANI)
|
