KOCHI: In a setback to the governor and chancellor of universities in the state, Kerala high court on Monday dismissed petitions challenging a single bench decision holding the appointments of temporary vice-chancellors in the Kerala University of Digital Sciences, Innovation and Technology and the APJ Abdul Kalam Technological University (KTU), made without the recommendation of the state govt, as unsustainable.
A division bench of Justices Anil K Narendran and P V Balakrishnan rejected the appeals filed by the chancellor and temporary vice-chancellors of the digital university and KTU, Ciza Thomas and K Sivaprasad. Taking note of the prolonged administrative stalemate in both universities and its adverse impact on their functioning and students, the court urged the chancellor and the state govt to act proactively and ensure regular appointments to the posts without further delay.
The appeals primarily challenged the single bench's finding that appointments made without the govt's recommendation are bad in law, as both the university acts mandate such recommendation and limit the tenure of temporary vice-chancellors to six months. They also questioned the legality of these provisions under both the Acts, contending that they are inconsistent with the UGC Regulations and alleging repugnancy under Article 254 of the Constitution, which provides that in case of conflict between state and central legislation, the central law prevails.
The bench, however, rejected this contention, holding that the UGC Regulations, 2010 and 2018, are silent on the appointment of temporary vice-chancellors. It clarified that Section 13(7) of the KTU Act and Section 11(10) of the Digital University Act, which permit temporary appointments for a period not exceeding six months, are not governed by the UGC Regulations. Therefore, the question of repugnancy under Article 254 does not arise.
Under Section 13(7) of the KTU Act, the chancellor may appoint the vice-chancellor of any other university, the pro-vice-chancellor of KTU, or the secretary to govt, higher education department, as recommended by the govt, to serve as the vice-chancellor for a period not exceeding six months. Similarly, under Section 11(10) of the Digital University Act, the chancellor may appoint the vice-chancellor of any other university or the secretary of the electronics and information technology department, as recommended by the govt, to serve as the vice-chancellor for a period not exceeding six months.
The court further held that, under both the Acts, the chancellor has no power to issue a notification to appoint temporary vice-chancellors in the digital university or KTU without the recommendation of the govt, until further orders, pending regular appointments.
Finding no grounds to interfere with the single bench decision, the division bench dismissed the appeals. In light of the judgment, Thomas and Sivaprasad cannot continue as temporary vice-chancellors of their respective universities. They were appointed to the posts through notifications on Nov 27, 2024, and their tenure had ended on May 27.
Start a Conversation
Post comment