AMU PhD student approaches Delhi HC against leader’s appointment

A scientist at Aligarh Muslim University (AMU) has filed an objection before the Delhi High Court against the appointment of her doctoral supervisor.

The student claims that the supervisor was appointed on the recommendation of a professor who is currently facing trial for sexual harassment.

The court has directed the Centre, the University Grants Commission, the AMU and the professor to respond to the student’s petition.

In her petition, the scientist claimed that her former lecturer, the professor, “regularly attempted to make sexual advances and advances towards her, which went so far as to touch her inappropriately and/or make sexually charged comments.”

She claims that the professor asked her for a sexual favor in April last year, which she “simply refused.”

After her rejection, the professor reportedly reacted hostilely, declaring her four years of research work “useless and unsuitable for the award of a doctorate,” although he had previously rated her monthly research progress as “satisfactory.”

The petition states that the Internal Complaints Committee (ICC) acquitted the professor of sexual harassment charges, following which the student filed an FIR and the case is now being heard in court. It adds that a “henchman” of the professor has filed a counter FIR against the student under sections 323 (intentionally causing hurt), 504 (intentionally causing insult) and 506 (criminal intimidation) of the IPC.

The student then requested the appointment of a new supervisor, preferably a woman. The Committee on Advanced Studies and Research appointed a new supervisor in a meeting in August last year, who appeared as a witness in the counter-complaint filed against the student, the petition further said.

The petition filed through advocate Hilaluddin argues that “the appointment of a PhD supervisor as per the AMU statutes is the jurisdiction of the Board of Studies (BoS) of the concerned faculty of AMU and not the jurisdiction of CASR which is an entirely different body.”

The student also claims that her PhD ended on December 31, 2023, without her being able to submit her dissertation due to the “unfair, unjust, illegal and arbitrary actions of the AMU authorities”.

“There are unusual and unnecessary hurdles in the submission of plaintiff’s doctoral thesis, particularly in the fact that she has been sent from pillar to post for the past 11 months because she demanded fair and equal conditions,” the plea states.

She asked the court to extend her position as a doctoral student as a serious researcher for at least ten months.