Kerala Administrative Tribunal Sets Aside Appointments Of Principals Of Three Government Law Colleges For Being Contrary To UGC Norms

The Kerala Administrative Tribunal at Thiruvananthapuram on Wednesday set aside the appointments of three Government Law College Principals for being contrary to UGC Regulations. It thereby directed the constitution of a selection committee for conducting the selection for appointment of Principals in the Government Law Colleges in accordance with the UGC Regulations, 2010 as against all the vacancies of Principals as on 29.3.2017 for which a select list was published on 30.08.2018. The Bench comprising Justice P.V. Asha and Mr. P.K. Kesavan passed the order setting aside the appointments of the Principals of the Government Law Colleges of Thiruvananthapuram, Thrissur, and Ernakulam. "When there was a direction by the Full Bench of the Hon'ble High Court that appointments of principals shall be made in accordance with the UGC Regulations, 2010, the action of the respondents in not conducting the selection in tune with the same cannot be accepted. It is seen from the select list dated 30.8.2018 that the same was prepared and published as against vacancies as on 29.3.2017. As the said select list is seen drawn, contrary to the provisions contained in the UGC Regulations, 2010 as well as the directions contained in the judgment of the Full Bench in Radhakrishna Pillai's case, it is only appropriate that fresh selection is made as against all those vacancies for which that select list was drawn in accordance with the UGC Regulations 2010 and thereafter all other vacancies which arose subsequently in accordance with the UGC Regulations 2018", the Tribunal observed. The applications herein sought a direction to the respondent State authorities to make the appointments to the post of Principal in Government Law Colleges in the State in accordance with the UGC Regulations, 2010. The applicants relied upon the Apex Court decisions in Gambirdhan K. Gadvi v. State of Gujarat & Ors. [2022 LiveLaw (SC) 242], and Prof. (Dr.) Sreejith P.S. v. Rajasree M.S. & Ors. [2022 LiveLaw (SC) 871] to contend that in case of any conflict between State Legislation and Central Legislation, the Central Legislation shall prevail as per the Doctrine of Repugnancy enshrined in Article 254 of the Constitution. It was thereby contended by the applicants that even if the state Government did not adopt the UGC Regulations, nor amend the State Legislation in tune with the Regulations, what is to be looked into is whether the appointments are to be made in accordance the Regulations. It was pointed out that the UGC Regulations only stipulates appointments by direct recruitment, and that the said appointments ought to be for a period of 5 years. The direct recruitment is thus to be made only after issuing a circular inviting applications, which is publicized all over India. On the other hand, it was averred by the existing Government Law College Principals that the Division Bench of the Kerala High Court had, vide its Judgment dated 22nd August 2022, dismissed the prayer for issuance of quo warranto against them, on finding that the petitioner therein had not "made out a case of usurpers against respondents in the post of Principal". The Tribunal noted that the High Court in the said case had found that Dr. Bijukurnar, Dr. Bindu M.Nambiar and Dr.V.R.layadevan had the requisite educational qualifications as prescribed by the UGC Regulations and sufficient qualifying service in the post of Lecturer in Law/Associate Professor/Professor at Government Law Colleges, and to occupy the post of Principal. It had also been directed that one of the applicants herein, Dr. Bindu M. Nambiar, be appointed since she was qualified. The Division Bench had further observed that the contention that the Hon'ble Apex Court protected only those Principals who were appointed prior to 23.2.2016, was also unsustainable. The Tribunal noted that in Radhakrishnan Pillai v. Travancore Devaswom Board (2016), the Full Bench of the Kerala High Court had categorically laid down that, "...irrespective of whether the University Acts enacted under Entry 25 of list III or the Statutes framed thereunder are amended , in line with the UGC Regulations or not, in view of its adoption by the State of Kerala, with effect from 18/09/2010 as per Government Order dated 10/12/2020, the Universities and affiliated colleges in Kerala State are bound to comply with the UGC Regulations, 2010". The Full Bench had also issued certain directions in the individual petitions before it. When Special Leave Petitions were preferred before the Apex Court by the State, the same also came to be dismissed by the Court on noting that the "law has been settled by the High Court finally by the judgment of the Full Bench of the High Court of Kerala dated 23.02.2016 regarding the application of U.G.C. Regulations". The Full Bench had also specifically considered the issue of appointment of Principals of the Law Colleges, and directed that appointments ought to be made as per the UGC Regulations, 2010. The Tribunal ...

Kerala Administrative Tribunal Sets Aside Appointments Of Principals Of Three Government Law Colleges For Being Contrary To UGC Norms

Navya Benny

Tags