Delhi HC halts recruitment at DU’s St. Stephen’s College after ad hoc teachers allege irregularities

St. Stephen’s College’s recruitment process “raises pertinent questions that require consideration” observed the Delhi High Court in a judgment issued earlier this week. Ad-hoc teachers working at the college since 2019 have moved the court against a recent round of appointments – made mere weeks before present principal John Varghese completes his term – that would have displaced them.

This May 13 judgment further widens the rift between Delhi University and the college affiliated to it. DU told the court that “recruitment process undertaken by the college is contrary to the applicable shortlisting guidelines framed by the executive council of the university”. EC is the highest statutory body of the college.

Only on May 14, the DU registrar also wrote to the chairman of the governing body of St. Stephen’s College, objecting to the appointment of the new principal. On May 11, the religious minority college’s supreme council had announced the appointment of Susan Elias as its 15th and first woman principal.

Also read ANRF PAIR Programme gives Rs 100 crore to just 7 hub-spoke networks, rest get Rs 2 crore grants

St. Stephen’s College: Petition questioned process

The petitioners have sought relief from the court in the form of regularisation of their jobs from the initial dates of appointment, continuity of service, fixation of pay pay, grant of seniority, and other benefits available to regular employees.

The assistant professors were recruited following the process prescribed by DU for the years 2018-21. The four petitioners were working in the departments of philosophy, Sanskrit, English and Hindi, from 2019, 2018, 2019 and 2021, respectively.

The petitioners have pointed out that the selection was solely on the basis of interview performance and that the college shortlisted nearly seventy candidates against each vacancy, contrary to the shortlisting criteria prescribed by the university.

“It is contended that this exercise lowers the cut-off standards to accommodate candidates possessing comparatively lower academic scores and lacking teaching experience, thereby depriving the petitioners of a fair and meaningful opportunity in the selection process despite their higher academic merit, long teaching experience, and continuous engagement with the college over several years,” the petition stated.

Also on May 11, the day the new principal’s appointment was announced, assistant professors working in the department of physics moved the court. They were also provided relief by the court which directed the college not to annul their appointment.

Also read NEET UG in CBT mode from 2027: Dharmendra Pradhan

Delhi University to Court: College hiring against rules

The counsel representing DU – the petitioners had made the University of Delhi one of the respondents – said the recruitment process at St. Stephen’s had been against the rules but objected to the relief sought in the petition – the regularisation of the temporary staff.

The counsel, Mohinder JS Rupal, also said that the university has already written to the college advising it not to proceed further with the recruitment process in view of the erroneous shortlisting criteria.

Earlier, the university’s executive council had constituted a committee to look into the recruitment process of the college. Despite that, the college had continued with recruitment.

Sources in the college allege that “several unscrupulous means were adopted during the recruitment to favour certain candidates”.

Also read Another IIT, 5 DU colleges to launch ITEP courses in 2026 even as seats go vacant in top institutes

Current teachers stay till next hearing: Delhi HC

The court said, “Their apprehension of displacement is founded upon the recruitment process initiated under the impugned advertisement. Significantly, the University of Delhi itself has taken the position that the shortlisting process adopted by the respondent college is contrary to the applicable guidelines and has advised the college not to proceed further with the recruitment exercise. These circumstances raise pertinent questions that require consideration.”

The court has said that the petitioners should not be displaced till the next date of hearing. The matter is now scheduled for October 6, 2026.