A write-up by a bunch of SRCC students circulated in the university the same year said all Stephanians got in with a 15 per cent increase in cut-off, implying it was a ‘partial institution’ whose students didn’t deserve the academic kudos they got. Others labeled it a snob institution, which aspired to break away from the university it was affiliated to. The disinformation wasn’t pointless: it aimed to puncture the goodwill about the college.

But was it, and is it, a ‘different’ college? Yes. And it’s not just the admission policies that are responsible for this. It’s what comes during and after the admissions: the drive for excellence. That is why the college doesn’t need an extra quota to support its policies.

Despite having one of the largest campuses in Delhi University, this college has stuck to its select, traditional courses. One room to be built for a new media orientation school was made after lengthy discussions on how it should comply with the heritage building. These exercises displayed the college’s exploration of excellence.

It was never ‘easy’ for the Christian students. Most of them were from non-Hindi speaking homes, but this did not exempt them from a Hindi subsidiary examination. They were not handed their degrees illegally when many failed this — they just had to keep trying. All tutorials and subsidiary classes were, and are, accounted for. This is because Christian students, some of whom applied through the quota and were eligible for the 15 per cent increase, do not get preferential treatment: every Stephanian is exhorted to work hard, in both academics and extra-curricular activities. The college builds its pride in shaping each student, no matter where he is from, or who he was when he entered the college, quotas be damned.

The admission policies have an unerring weapon that serves the purpose of inclusion: the interview. Every Stephanian has to cross this, and these are the ten minutes where the student will be asked her economic and religious background. But most important is the column at the bottom of the admission form, which asks the student about herself. You can’t ace it until the college teachers see a spark in the student. That’s why there is no crash course yet for acing the Stephen’s interview.

The interview in itself makes space for a student from a disadvantaged background. The new symbol of power for the institution are the Christian students who build their identity, and sense of self-worth, by applying through the general category. There is space in the mandatory individual interview to provide for a poor or disadvantaged Christian, yet deserving, scholar. The college has always provided financial assistance to those who need it. This can be explored further.

And it’s not as if quotas don’t loom over the quota students. Myths abound: like the large history and BA programme classes are just ways for Christian students to get in. Students who get in through the ST quota wished they didn’t apply through it, while others, like my friends, both ST and Christian, applied through the general category. The flip side is the Hindu students who produced fake baptism certificates.

The college now has two things to protect: its identity as an institution which handpicks and grooms all its students. But more important is the sense of community that the college has built within its walls.

Setting up a Dalit Christian quota along with the Christian quota will divide a community which makes no distinctions between a Christian and general student. In an institution with unique and inclusive admission policies, there is no need for a quota that can be manipulated.