Delhi High Court Stays JNU Akoijam Termination Over Procedural Lapse

• The Delhi High Court has stayed the termination of JNU professor and Congress MP Angomcha Bimol Akoijam.
• Justice Anup Jairam Bhambhani issued the interim order after Akoijam argued he received no notice before his dismissal.
• Akoijam was terminated by JNU on October 9 following an internal inquiry into sexual harassment allegations.
• Akoijam denies the allegations and claims procedural lapses and political motivation in the proceedings.
• The Delhi Police has also registered an FIR against Akoijam, and an investigation is currently underway.

The Delhi High Court recently issued an interim order, effectively staying the Jawaharlal Nehru University's decision to terminate Angomcha Bimol Akoijam from his position as a professor.

The Delhi High Court recently issued an interim order, effectively staying the Jawaharlal Nehru University's decision to terminate Angomcha Bimol Akoijam from his position as a professor. Justice Anup Jairam Bhambhani delivered the ruling after arguments highlighted a critical procedural omission by the university. Akoijam, who also serves as a Congress Lok Sabha MP, had his dismissal from JNU's Centre for the Study of Social Systems under the School of Social Sciences put on hold following his challenge to the university's action.

The court's intervention came after Akoijam contended that he was not issued any prior notice before the university proceeded with his removal. This argument proved pivotal in securing the temporary relief. The High Court not only stayed the termination but also formally issued a notice to JNU, requiring the institution to respond to Akoijam's petition. This development marks a significant pause in the disciplinary proceedings initiated by the university against the prominent academic and politician.

Akoijam's dismissal, which took effect on October 9, stemmed from an internal inquiry into serious allegations of sexual harassment. Multiple women students had filed complaints, prompting the university's internal committee to investigate the matter. Following its findings, the committee recommended a major penalty against Akoijam.

Acting on this recommendation, the JNU administration proceeded with his immediate termination. However, Akoijam has consistently refuted these allegations, characterizing the entire process as politically motivated and citing significant procedural lapses in the conduct of the inquiry. Adding another layer to the situation, the Delhi Police has also registered a First Information Report (FIR) against Akoijam in connection with these same allegations, with an ongoing investigation.

The core of the Delhi High Court's interim decision rests on the fundamental principle of natural justice, specifically the requirement for due process. Justice Bhambhani's order underscored the necessity of providing proper notice to an individual before implementing a decision as severe as termination. Akoijam's legal team, led by Advocate Moirangthem Gunedhor Singh, successfully argued that this crucial step was overlooked by JNU.

The court's issuance of a notice to JNU signifies that the university will now be required to present its justification for the termination and address the procedural concerns raised. This legal challenge is set for its next hearing in January 2027, indicating a protracted legal battle ahead. Advocates David Ahongsangbam, Hijam Chandrakumar, and Ashlikumar Athokpam also represented Akoijam in the proceedings.

This interim stay by the Delhi High Court serves as a potent reminder of the strict procedural requirements governing disciplinary actions, particularly within public institutions like Jawaharlal Nehru University. Even in cases involving grave allegations such as sexual harassment, adherence to established protocols, including the issuance of prior notice, remains paramount. The court's decision emphasizes that substantive findings, however serious, do not supersede the necessity of procedural fairness.

The ongoing investigation by the Delhi Police, alongside the university's internal process and the High Court's intervention, highlights the multi-faceted legal landscape surrounding such allegations. While the stay is temporary, it ensures that Akoijam's termination cannot proceed without a full judicial review of the procedural integrity of JNU's actions, setting a precedent for meticulous adherence to due process in future institutional disciplinary matters.

This interim order from the Delhi High Court serves as a critical reminder for lawyers advising on employment and administrative law, particularly concerning disciplinary actions in public institutions. It underscores the paramount importance of adhering to principles of natural justice and due process, specifically the requirement of issuing proper notice before taking adverse decisions like termination, even when serious allegations are involved. Lawyers should advise clients to meticulously follow procedural guidelines to avoid similar judicial interventions.

Source: Original reporting via the provided source.