"We understand the situation. The matter requires effective hearing which can't be done by a vacation bench. There will only be a few days delay. It will be heard by the roster bench in July," a bench comprising justices Pratibha Rani and V Kameswar Rao said.
The observation was made by the vacation bench before which two cross petitions seeking a final resolution to the conflict between Delhi University and University Grants Commission was listed for hearing.
A PIL by an advocate sought restoration of the earlier pattern of three-year honours courses as directed by UGC, while the other, by a group of students admitted in FYUP last year, is against the commission's decision.
Senior advocate Meet Malhotra mentioned the matter on behalf of the eight students of Maharaja Agrasen College who are pursuing their four-year course under the FYUP and are in favour of the same, while the PIL seeking scrapping of FYUP and restoration of the earlier three-year programme was mentioned by advocate R K Kapoor.
Kapoor has sought a resolution of the "controversy" saying, "Most of the university's colleges are deferring admissions, leading to confusion among lakhs of aspirants just a day before the admission process was to begin."
He has contended that "FYUP violates the National Education Policy 1986, which advocates the 10+2+3 system, and therefore it is necessary, that DU must revert to the earlier system".
The students in their plea said that UGC's decision to scrap FYUP is a "grossly arbitrary and whimsical action".
They said that under FYUP, every student after three years of study will get a 'Bachelors' degree, as per National Education Policy, while a 'Bachelor with Honours' degree will be given on completion of four years.
Yesterday, a DU professor had moved the Supreme Court challenging UGC's decision to scrap the FYUP.
The apex court, however, had refused to intervene in the issue and had directed the professor, Aditya Narayan Mishra, to approach the Delhi High Court.
Mishra in his plea before the apex court had submitted that FYUP is valid and the ordinance brought by the university regarding this is consistent with the UGC guidelines.
A year after the programme was introduced, DU and UGC are at loggerheads over the course.
UGC has issued directions both to DU and all 64 colleges under it to conduct admissions under the three-year programme and not under the FYUP introduced by the varsity last year.
It has also warned DU and its colleges of "consequences" if they fail to implement the Commission's direction.
Kapoor's petition also states that 44 colleges under DU have voted against FYUP after implementing it last year.