Gujarat HC Quashes IIM-Ahmedabad Order Expelling Three PhD Scholars
Description :-
The Gujarat High Court has set aside the Indian Institute of Management Ahmedabad’s (IIM-A) decision to expel three first-year PhD scholars over alleged academic underperformance. The court observed that the institute’s action was not in line with the provisions laid down in the Doctoral Programme in Management (DPM) manual.
Justice Nikhil Kariel noted that the DPM rules allow doctoral fellows additional time to improve their academic performance if they fail to meet the required standards during the initial assessment period. As per the manual, students are entitled to a review and remedial process, including the possibility of an extra year, before being asked to leave the programme.
The case involved three doctoral candidates—Abhilasha Kumar, Atul Gupta and Uthara P K—who were issued show-cause notices on May 22, asking them to explain why their admission to the second year of the programme should not be withdrawn. The scholars were given only 24 hours to respond, after which the executive committee ordered their expulsion. Their subsequent appeal was rejected by the IIM-A director without granting them a personal hearing.
Counsel appearing for the students argued that the decision was disproportionate and punitive, especially considering that the scholars came from diverse academic backgrounds. They contended that the DPM manual does not envisage expulsion solely on the basis of academic shortfall during the first year of coursework and mandates remedial measures instead.
The court was also informed that one of the students had been accused of academic dishonesty for allegedly submitting fabricated references generated using artificial intelligence in an assignment. However, the lawyers maintained that even in this case, the student was denied a fair opportunity to be heard.
While IIM-Ahmedabad claimed that it had strictly adhered to the DPM guidelines, the High Court disagreed. The court pointed out that the coursework stage of the PhD programme is to be completed within two years, with an additional year provided under Clause 7.5.2 for meeting academic requirements. Therefore, directing the students to leave the programme before exhausting these provisions was contrary to the rules.
The High Court further ruled that the order issued by the chairperson of the DPM on October 6, 2025, asking the petitioners to exit the programme, lacked legal authority and violated prescribed procedures. Consequently, the court declared the expulsion order null and void, along with the subsequent decision taken by the institute’s director.