Kerala High Court Dismisses Plea By Former VC Of Sree Sankaracharya University Of Sanskrit Challenging His Removal By The Chancellor
The Kerala High Court has dismissed the appeal of Dr. M. V. Narayanan, Vice Chancellor of Sree Sankaracharya University of Sanskrit against an order of the single judge bench refusing to vacate the order passed by the Chancellor of the university removing the appellant as Vice Chancellor.A division bench of Justices AK Jayasankaran Nambiar and Kauser Edappagath stated that “we are of the...
The Kerala High Court has dismissed the appeal of Dr. M. V. Narayanan, Vice Chancellor of Sree Sankaracharya University of Sanskrit against an order of the single judge bench refusing to vacate the order passed by the Chancellor of the university removing the appellant as Vice Chancellor.
A division bench of Justices AK Jayasankaran Nambiar and Kauser Edappagath stated that “we are of the view that the impugned order of the learned Single Judge insofar as it is adverse to the appellant herein does not warrant any interference”.
A single judge bench of Justice Mohammed Nias CP had previously refused to grant a stay of operation, reasoning that as only one name had been forwarded by the selection committee, it is not only in violation of 7.3 of UGC Regulations, 2018 but also the ratio established in Rajasree's case.
On March 7, the Chancellor passed the order terming their appointment ab initio void by citing that it violates UGC Regulations. The Chancellor found that the constitution of the Search Committee was not in terms of the UGC Regulations 2018, thus vitiating the selection and held that the appointment of the Vice Chancellor of Dr M. V. Narayanan is void ab initio, and directed him to vacate the office forthwith.
The counsel for the appellant submitted that Rajasree's case can be distinguished on the basis that there is material evidence to establish that the Chancellor had waived the requirement of sending a panel of names and had specifically instructed the search committee to send only one name for consideration. Additionally, the counsel pointed out that Regulation 7.3 of the UGC Regulations, 2018 is ultra vires the provision of Section 26 (power to make regulations) of the UGC Act and as such, cannot be relied upon to find the appointment void ab initio.
The court noted that the contention of Regulation 7.3 being ultra vires ought to be debated during the adjudication of the writ petition.
“Even assuming that the said argument succeeds before the learned Single Judge, we are of the view that the action of the Chancellor impugned in these proceedings will nevertheless be saved by the defacto doctrine that will apply to protect the actions taken by various authorities under the extant Regulations till such time as they are declared as ultra vires and void” observed the court.
Counsel for Petitioner: Advocates A Muhammed Musthafa and MP Sreekrishnan
Counsel for Respondent: Advocates S Prasanth, Dinesh Mathew J Muricken, S Krishnamoorthy, Jaishankar V Nair, VK Shamsudeen
Case Title: Dr. MV Narayanan v. The Chancellor, Sree Sankaracharya University of Sanskrit and ors.
Case Number: WA No. 446 of 2024
Case Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Ker) 204