NEW DELHI: The Supreme Court on Monday made adverse comments on the selection process that led to the appointment of Naima Khatoon as the first woman vice-chancellor of Aligarh Muslim University (AMU), saying the participation of her husband Mohd Gulrez, the officiating vice-chancellor, in the process was not proper.
A bench of CJI Bhushan R Gavai and Justices K Vinod Chandran and N V Anjaria said, "Certainly, the husband's participation in the selection process is not proper when his wife is a candidate. He should have recused and made his deputy participate in it. The selection process should not only be fair but also appear to be fair".
The remarks came on appeals filed against a judgment of Allahabad HC, which too had disapproved of the participation of Khatoon's husband in the selection process, but upheld her selection by the President, who is the visitor of the university, as the vice-chancellor of AMU.
Appearing for the petitioners, senior advocate Kapil Sibal explained how voting in the executive council was tailored to insert Khatoon's name into the panel of five names - Faizan Mustafa, Qayyum Husain, Muzaffar Uruj Rabbani and Furqan Qamar were the other candidates - for the purpose. When these names were placed before the AMU Court (Senate), Rabbani got 61 votes, Mustafa, 50 votes, and Khatoon, 50 votes. These three names were sent to the President of India, who chose Khatoon as VC, and she was appointed to the post in Apr last year.
Despite the CJI's adverse comments, the court adjourned the hearing as Justice Chandran recused himself, on the ground that as chancellor he had recommended the appointment of Faizan Mustafa as the VC of Chanakya National Law University, Patna.
Solicitor general Tushar Mehta said Justice Chandran need not recuse himself as the parties had full faith in him. He held that Gulrez's participation in the selection process did not affect the sanctity of Prof Khatoon's appointment as AMU VC as her name was included in the panel of three names by the AMU Court.
Additional solicitor general Aishwarya Bhati told the bench that the selection process had followed the rules and regulations scrupulously and that the high court, after examining the allegations, had upheld her appointment as the AMU vice-chancellor.
Sibal said he had no issues with the Visitor's choice, but if the allegations of manipulation were examined and found true, then Khatoon's name would not have figured on the list of five names forwarded to the AMU court by the executive council.
A bench of CJI Bhushan R Gavai and Justices K Vinod Chandran and N V Anjaria said, "Certainly, the husband's participation in the selection process is not proper when his wife is a candidate. He should have recused and made his deputy participate in it. The selection process should not only be fair but also appear to be fair".
The remarks came on appeals filed against a judgment of Allahabad HC, which too had disapproved of the participation of Khatoon's husband in the selection process, but upheld her selection by the President, who is the visitor of the university, as the vice-chancellor of AMU.
Appearing for the petitioners, senior advocate Kapil Sibal explained how voting in the executive council was tailored to insert Khatoon's name into the panel of five names - Faizan Mustafa, Qayyum Husain, Muzaffar Uruj Rabbani and Furqan Qamar were the other candidates - for the purpose. When these names were placed before the AMU Court (Senate), Rabbani got 61 votes, Mustafa, 50 votes, and Khatoon, 50 votes. These three names were sent to the President of India, who chose Khatoon as VC, and she was appointed to the post in Apr last year.
Despite the CJI's adverse comments, the court adjourned the hearing as Justice Chandran recused himself, on the ground that as chancellor he had recommended the appointment of Faizan Mustafa as the VC of Chanakya National Law University, Patna.
Solicitor general Tushar Mehta said Justice Chandran need not recuse himself as the parties had full faith in him. He held that Gulrez's participation in the selection process did not affect the sanctity of Prof Khatoon's appointment as AMU VC as her name was included in the panel of three names by the AMU Court.
Additional solicitor general Aishwarya Bhati told the bench that the selection process had followed the rules and regulations scrupulously and that the high court, after examining the allegations, had upheld her appointment as the AMU vice-chancellor.
Sibal said he had no issues with the Visitor's choice, but if the allegations of manipulation were examined and found true, then Khatoon's name would not have figured on the list of five names forwarded to the AMU court by the executive council.
