<p>The Delhi High Court has restrained the heads of nine JNU centres from taking any “major decisions”, saying that their appointment by the varsity's Vice-Chancellor was prima facie without any authority.</p>.<p>A bench presided over by Justice Rajiv Shakdher said that the Vice-Chancellor is not vested with the power to appoint chairpersons of centres or special centres as the JNU statute confers the power of appointment on the Executive Council.</p>.<p>The bench, also comprising Justice Talwant Singh, was dealing with an appeal against a single judge order which had refused to grant a stay on the appointments on a petition by Professor Atul Sood.</p>.<p><strong>Also Read | <a href="https://www.deccanherald.com/national/north-and-central/jnu-cancels-webinar-on-kashmir-says-subject-objectionable-1045575.html">JNU cancels webinar on Kashmir, says subject 'objectionable'</a></strong></p>.<p>The bench said it was “cognizant of the fact that the Centres/Special Centres need Chairpersons for effective functioning”, so it asked the single judge, who is hearing the challenge to the appointments, to advance the hearing on the writ petition.</p>.<p>“We are prima facie of the view that the Vice-Chancellor is not vested with the power to appoint chairpersons of centres/special centres. The statute confers the power of appointment on the Executive Council. Thus, clearly, the appointment of chairpersons of centres/special centres is, as is evident at this stage, prima facie, without authority,” the bench said in its order dated October 26.</p>.<p>The court, however, clarified that the views are only prima facie and the single judge will decide the writ petition on merits, after hearing both sides.</p>.<p><strong>Also Read | <a href="https://www.deccanherald.com/national/north-and-central/students-activists-demand-justice-for-missing-jnu-student-najeeb-ahmed-1041019.html">Students, activists demand justice for missing JNU student Najeeb Ahmed</a></strong></p>.<p>Lawyer Abhik Chimni, representing the appellant, said that the exercise of the power of appointment in the present case by the Vice-Chancellor was null and void in law and such a decision could not have been approved by Executive Council subsequently.</p>.<p>JNU counsel Monika Arora, for her part, contended that the power to appoint chairpersons to various centres is exercised by the Vice-Chancellor from time to time, which is subsequently ratified by the Executive Council.</p>.<p><strong>Watch the latest DH Videos here:</strong></p>
<p>The Delhi High Court has restrained the heads of nine JNU centres from taking any “major decisions”, saying that their appointment by the varsity's Vice-Chancellor was prima facie without any authority.</p>.<p>A bench presided over by Justice Rajiv Shakdher said that the Vice-Chancellor is not vested with the power to appoint chairpersons of centres or special centres as the JNU statute confers the power of appointment on the Executive Council.</p>.<p>The bench, also comprising Justice Talwant Singh, was dealing with an appeal against a single judge order which had refused to grant a stay on the appointments on a petition by Professor Atul Sood.</p>.<p><strong>Also Read | <a href="https://www.deccanherald.com/national/north-and-central/jnu-cancels-webinar-on-kashmir-says-subject-objectionable-1045575.html">JNU cancels webinar on Kashmir, says subject 'objectionable'</a></strong></p>.<p>The bench said it was “cognizant of the fact that the Centres/Special Centres need Chairpersons for effective functioning”, so it asked the single judge, who is hearing the challenge to the appointments, to advance the hearing on the writ petition.</p>.<p>“We are prima facie of the view that the Vice-Chancellor is not vested with the power to appoint chairpersons of centres/special centres. The statute confers the power of appointment on the Executive Council. Thus, clearly, the appointment of chairpersons of centres/special centres is, as is evident at this stage, prima facie, without authority,” the bench said in its order dated October 26.</p>.<p>The court, however, clarified that the views are only prima facie and the single judge will decide the writ petition on merits, after hearing both sides.</p>.<p><strong>Also Read | <a href="https://www.deccanherald.com/national/north-and-central/students-activists-demand-justice-for-missing-jnu-student-najeeb-ahmed-1041019.html">Students, activists demand justice for missing JNU student Najeeb Ahmed</a></strong></p>.<p>Lawyer Abhik Chimni, representing the appellant, said that the exercise of the power of appointment in the present case by the Vice-Chancellor was null and void in law and such a decision could not have been approved by Executive Council subsequently.</p>.<p>JNU counsel Monika Arora, for her part, contended that the power to appoint chairpersons to various centres is exercised by the Vice-Chancellor from time to time, which is subsequently ratified by the Executive Council.</p>.<p><strong>Watch the latest DH Videos here:</strong></p>