Supreme Court Issues Notice On Plea Challenging Re-Appointment Of Kannur University VC

The Supreme Court on April 4 issued notice in the SLP challenging the Re appointment of the Vice Chancellor of Kannur University. A bench comprising Justices S Abdul Nazeer and Vikram Nath issued notice on the Special Leave Petition that assailed Kerala High Court's order datedFebruary 23, 2022 ("impugned judgement") wherein a Division Bench had upheld Single Judge's order of dismissing the writ challenging VC's re appointment.The Single Judge had dismissed the writ preferred by elected members of the Senate and Academic Council of Kannur University holding that the impugned appointment violated no statutory provisions of "Re appointment" of the current VC. The petitioners in the SLP relied on section 10(9) of the Kannur University Act to contend that when the notification of Re-appointment of VC was issued in November 23, 2021, he had crossed the age of sixty which is the age limit for appointment to that post. Referring to the same, they argued that as on that date the VC was not eligible to be appointed. "In fact, when the initial notification was published calling for applications for appointment to the post of Vice Chancellor, it was realised that Respondent No. 4 would not have been eligible to apply in view of the age limit. It is only to overcome that hurdle the initial notifications were withdrawn and the impugned notification was published, in a surreptitious attempt to bypass prescribed procedure for appointments, a step taken for ensuring the legal mandate as provided in the UGC Regulation, which is mandatory in Thus, if Respondent No. 4 could not make an application, the prohibition stipulated under the said sub section would disentitle him from being considered for the post itself for appointment or re appointment," plea added. It was argued in the SLP that the impugned judgment was ex facie erroneous and contrary to well settled principles of service jurisprudence because it proceeded on a wrong assumption. The petitioners had also relied on Section 10(10) of the Kannur University Act to contend that the language of the section and the proviso attached thereto would unequivocally evidence the legislative intent that a person can be appointed as the Vice Chancellor for a maximum of two terms. "If a person is once given an appointment, it would only enable him an opportunity to be considered for appointment for one more term. The express language of the provision does not grant a candidate, who is already appointed as the Vice Chancellor, evade the mandatory eligibility criteria and to be inducted as the Vice Chancellor again," the plea stated. The petitioner had further stated that the judgment assumed that once an appointment to a post was made through proper channel, re-appointment of the same person to such office upon expiry of the first term can bypass the original procedure prescribed, including constitution of a selection committee. "While doing so the High Court has assumed that there is a distinction in procedure for 'appointments' and 'reappointments', whereas there is no such distinction recognised under law," the plea further stated. The petitioners were represented by Senior Advocate Mr. Dama Sheshadri Naidu, and Advocates Mr. MP Vinod, Mr. Atul Shankar Vinod and Ms. Shivali Chauudhary. It may be noted that the bench headed by Justice LN Rao recently while issuing notice in a petition challenging the appointment of the Vice-Chancellor of APJ Abdul Kalam University in Kerala, observed that its recent judgment, which held that UGC regulations are binding on State Universities even though they are not expressly adopted by the State Government, did not discuss an earlier judgment which took a contrary view. The referred judgment was delivered by a bench comprising Justice MR Shah and Justice BV Nagarathna on March 3, 2022, in the case Gambhirdan K Gadhvi v. State of Gujarat And Ors 2022 LiveLaw (SC) 242. In Gambhirdan case, the bench set aside the appointment of VC of Sardar Patel University in Gujarat observing that such appointment, even under a state legislation, cannot be contrary to the UGC norms. Case Title: Dr Premchandran Keezhoth & Anr v The Chancellor, Kannur University & OrsClick Here To Read/Download Order

Supreme Court Issues Notice On Plea Challenging Re-Appointment Of Kannur University VC

Shruti Kakkar

Tags