The Delhi High Court recently upheld the termination of a senior faculty member at Delhi University’s Jesus and Mary College for demanding bribes and other illegal gratification from students in exchange for attendance and marks.
In an order passed on September 12, Justice Jasmeet Singh said solicitation of illegal gratification from students is grave and strikes at the core of academic integrity. The Court rejected Dr Thelma J Talloo’s challenge to an arbitral award upholding her termination.
“In view of the matter, the proceedings were fair, the findings are supported by evidence and the penalty has already been tempered by leniency.
Hence, under Section 34 of the Act, no ground for setting aside or further modification of the award is made out by the petitioner. For the said reasons, the petition filed under Section 34 of the Act challenging the Award dated 23.10.2012 passed by the Appeals Committee constituted under Clause 9 of Annexure to Ordinance XII of the University of Delhi, is hereby dismissed,” the Court held.
Talloo, a former Reader in the Commerce Department at Jesus and Mary College, approached the High Court challenging an arbitral award from October 2012 delivered by the Appeals Committee of Delhi University affirming her dismissal for alleged misconduct. The dispute began in 2008 after students accused Dr Talloo of demanding cash and other goods, including a pearl string, in return for academic favours such as attendance and marks.
Talloo claimed these were fabricated complaints orchestrated due to personal enmity and administrative bias. She maintained that the audio recording against her was edited. The college and university established an inquiry committee and later an appeals committee both of which upheld misconduct charges after disciplinary proceedings. However, the appeals committee reduced the penalty from dismissal to termination, so that her retirement dues would not be affected.
Meanwhile, Tallo argued that the inquiry process was biased against her and she was denied opportunity to fair defence and proper legal representation. After considering the case, the High Court refused to interfere with the arbitral award.
Follow us
