Career in journalism does not require specific qualification: Delhi High Court dismisses appeal against appointment of IIMC DG

A Division Bench of the Delhi High Court recently dismissed an appeal challenging the appointment of Prof Sanjay Dwivedi as Director General (DG) of the Indian Institute of Mass Communication (IIMC) [Dr Ashutosh Mishra v. Indian Institute of Mass Communication & Ors]. .While dismissing the appeal against the order of the single-judge, the Bench of Chief Justice Satish Chandra Sharma and Justice Subramonium Prasad observed,"...unlike medicine or law, pursuing a career in journalism does not require possessing a specific qualification as such.".Sanjay Dwivedi was appointed to the post in July 2020. However, his appointment was challenged by one Dr Ashutosh Mishra on the grounds that he did not possess the necessary qualifications required for the post, and that there are allegations of fraud and criminal cases pending against him.The plea was dismissed by the single-judge in November 2020..The Bench was dealing with Mishra’s appeal arguing that Dwivedi does not possess the requisite work experience and that in addition to a Master’s degree, one requires a minimum 25 years of experience in the field of journalism/films/media with administrative experience of holding senior positions in professional institutions of national repute.Mishra also questioned Dwivedi's work experience as a sub-editor, claiming that during that time, he was a student of Bachelor of Journalism and Mass Communication (BJMC) as well as Master of Journalism and Mass Communication (MJMC). This means that he could not have been working and studying at the same time, and on the cut-off date, he had only 23 years of experience against the minimum requirement of 25 years, the Court was told..However, the Division Bench said that the judgment of the single-judge noted that the advertisement does not specify whether the work experience of a person applying for the post could only be calculated after attaining a Master’s degree.“The learned Single Judge has correctly observed that the requirement of holding a Master’s degree is disjunctive to the 25 years of experience that is stated in the advertisement, and the work experience of Respondent No.3 (Dwivedi) can be calculated before he completed his Master’s degree.”.Accordingly, on a holistic reading of the biodata of Dwivedi along with the advertisement dated June 13, 2019 issued by the IIMC, the Court held that Dwivedi’s appointment was not in violation of the rules prescribed.“Flowing from the judgements above as well as the educational qualifications/experience of Respondent No.3, this Court is of the opinion that the Appellant has failed to satisfactorily discharge the burden imposed on them that would warrant the interference of this Court by way of issuance of a writ of quo warranto. The observations of the learned Single Judge in the impugned Judgement dated 06.11.2020 are in consonance with the judicial precedents established in similar matters, and the appointment of Respondent No.3 is in accordance with the Recruitment Rules and the advertisement dated 13.06.2019 issued by IIMC.”.The appeal was, therefore, dismissed..Advocates NS Dalal, JB Mudgil, Devesh Pratap Singh and Alok Kumar appeared for Mishra.Additional Solicitor General Vikramjit Banerjee, along with Advocates Prashant Kumar, Shruti Aggarwal, Kartik Dey, Janhvi Prakash, Vijay Joshi and Anubhav Kumar appeared for the respondents. .[Read Order]