A Delhi University committee has flagged alleged deviations from university-approved shortlisting criteria in the recruitment of assistant professors at St Stephen’s College and recommended that the institution follow the university’s prescribed recruitment rules, according to a PTI report.The five-member committee found that the college had departed from the shortlisting norms approved by Delhi University’s statutory bodies. The deviations, it said, could have allowed candidates who would otherwise have been ineligible to qualify for interviews.St Stephen’s College, however, maintained that the university’s criteria were advisory in nature. It also argued that its status as a minority institution entitled it to determine the manner and process of selecting teachers.
DU committee questions assistant professor shortlisting criteria
The committee was constituted following deliberations at the Delhi University Executive Council meeting on April 29, 2026, under the chairmanship of Professor Inder Mohan Kapahy.According to PTI, the panel held meetings on May 7 and May 29 to examine the recruitment process. It sought information from the college on the shortlisting criteria, candidates’ Academic Performance Indicator (API) scores and the reasons for departing from the university-approved norms.The report stated that the college did not provide the requested information despite reminders. The committee also raised concerns over the timing of the disclosure of selection criteria. According to its findings, the criteria and evaluation methods for essay writing, presentations and interviews were not disclosed until after the screening process had been completed.
Philosophy department recruitment under scrutiny
The committee flagged the number of candidates shortlisted for assistant professor positions in the Philosophy department.According to the report, the college shortlisted 234 candidates for three unreserved vacancies and 11 candidates for one vacancy reserved for persons with benchmark disabilities.The panel noted that the college subsequently stated that it would shortlist 70 candidates for each unreserved vacancy. It also flagged the department’s cut-off score of 50, which was below the university-prescribed minimum academic score of 55.The committee further identified differences between the college’s criteria for assessing research publications and the university’s standard operating procedure governing publications considered for eligibility and screening.These discrepancies formed part of the panel’s concerns over whether the college had followed the recruitment framework approved by the university.
St Stephen’s recruitment continued while DU examined the matter
The report also raised questions about the timing of the recruitment results and the joining of selected candidates.Delhi University had advised St Stephen’s College, through a letter dated April 29, not to issue appointment letters while the matter was under examination. However, the committee’s report stated that the college declared the recruitment results on the night of May 9 and allowed selected candidates to join on May 11, before the examination was complete.The matter subsequently came before the Delhi High Court. According to the report, on May 13, the court directed that the recommendations of the selection committee under the relevant recruitment advertisement should not be implemented without its leave.The DU panel alleged that the college continued the joining process and assigned invigilation duties to selected candidates despite the court’s order.
DU panel cites university’s authority over teacher appointments
Citing the Delhi University Act, 1922, the committee maintained that the university’s authority over the appointment and recognition of teachers required its constituent colleges to follow the prescribed recruitment rules.The panel recommended that St Stephen’s College adhere to the university-approved shortlisting criteria to ensure uniformity and consistency in faculty appointments.The dispute centres on the extent to which a minority institution can determine its own teacher-selection process while operating within the recruitment framework of an affiliated university. The college has maintained that the university’s criteria are advisory, while the committee has called for compliance with the prescribed norms.The committee’s recommendations underline the need for clarity on recruitment standards, the disclosure of evaluation criteria and the implementation of selection procedures in university-affiliated colleges.(With inputs from PTI)
