SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2024 Supreme(AP) 1168

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI
DHIRAJ SINGH THAKUR, CJ., R. RAGHUNANDAN RAO, J.
Munavathu Dharu Naik, S/o. Munavathu Sakriya & Another. - Petitioners
Versus
Office of the Honourable Chancellor, Rep by its Principal Secretary and Others. – Respondents
W.P.(PIL) No.95 of 2023 along with Writ Petition No.17740 of 2023
Decided On : 26-06-2024

Advocates Appeared:
For the Petitioners: Mrs. Kavitha Gottipati, Mrs. A.V.S. Laxmi.
For the Respondents:Advocate General, Mr. S. Harinath Reddy, Standing Counsel, Mr. P. Raja Sekhar, Deputy Solicitor General of India, Mr. S. Harinath Reddy.

IMPORTANT POINT
Reappointment of Vice Chancellor without fresh selection is valid unless specified; initial appointment void for UGC non-compliance.

Headnote:

(A) Dr. YSR Horticultural University Act, 2007 - Section 26 - UGC Regulations, 2018 - Reappointment of Vice Chancellor - Challenge to reappointment on grounds of lack of fresh selection process and non-compliance with UGC regulations - Court held that reappointment without fresh selection is valid unless specifically required, but initial appointment void due to UGC non-compliance. (Paras 18-24)

(B) Legal principles - UGC regulations must be adhered to for Vice Chancellor appointments, and any deviation renders the appointment void ab initio. (Paras 21-22)

Facts of the case:

Petitioners challenge the reappointment of the Vice Chancellor without a fresh selection process and argue initial appointment violated UGC regulations.

Findings of Court:

The court found the reappointment unsustainable due to the initial appointment's non-compliance with UGC regulations.

Issues: Whether reappointment requires a fresh selection process and if initial appointment's non-compliance affects reappointment.

Ratio Decidendi: The court ruled that UGC regulations are mandatory, and failure to include a UGC nominee in the selection committee invalidates the appointment.

Result: Writ petitions allowed, declaring the appointment void ab initio.

JUDGMENT :

(Dhiraj Singh Thakur, CJ.)

Since common question of law and facts are involved in both these writ petitions, the same are taken up together for disposal by way of a common judgment and order.

2. The petitioners in this set of petitions challenge the G.O.Ms.No.29, dated 28.06.2023, issued by the Government whereby private respondent No.6- Dr. Janakiram Tholeti was reappointed as the Vice Chancellor of Dr. YSR Horticulture University and seek issuance of a writ of quo warranto challenging the Government Order primarily on two grounds:

    i. The reappointment of the said respondent No.6 was ordered without subjecting him to a fresh selection process; and

    ii. The reappointment was unsustainable inasmuch as even the initial appointment of the said respondent was not in accordance with the UGC regulations as the Search-cum-Selection-Committee constituted by the Government for selecting respondent No.6 did not have a nominee of the Chairman of the University Grants Commission as was required under Regulation 7.3 of the UGC Regulations, 2018.

3. At this stage, it would be necessary to give in brief the material facts in the backdrop of which the present controversy has arisen:

G.O.Rt.No.183, dated 21.03.2018, came to be issued by the Government in exercise of the powers conferred under Section 26(1) of the Dr. YSR Horticultural University Act, 2007, (for short, “the Act of 2007”) constituting a Search Committee consisting of the Chief Secretary, Government of Andhra Pradesh; Sri A. Rajendra Prasad, Vice Chancellor, Acharya Nagarjuna University, Guntur (State nominee); and Director General, Indian Council of Agricultural Research (ICAR), New Delhi, or his nominee to submit a panel of names for appointment as Vice Chancellor of Dr. YSR Horticulture University.

4. Subsequently, another G.O.Rt.No.215, dated 03.04.2018, came to be issued by the Government reconstituting the Search Committee, which this time consisted of Prof. Vidyavathi, former Vice Chancellor, Kakatiya University, instead of Sri A. Rajendra Prasad, apart from the Chief Secretary, Government of Andhra Pradesh and the Director General, ICAR.

Pursuant to the aforementioned Government Order, an advertisement notice, dated 08.05.2018, came to be issued by the Government of Andhra Pradesh inviting applications for the said post of Vice Chancellor.

5. Subsequently, it appears from the record that the Government issued another Government Order bearing G.O.Rt.No.714 dated 04.11.2019, reconstituting the Search Committee yet again consisting of:

    i. Chief Secretary, Government of Andhra Pradesh;

    ii. Sri P. Raghava Reddy, Ex-Vice Chancellor, Acharya N.G. Ranga Agricultural University (State nominee); and

    iii. Director General, Indian Council of Agricultural Research (ICAR), New Delhi or his nominee.

6. Another notification, dated 28.11.2019, subsequently came to be issued, inviting applications yet again for the post of Vice Chancellor of the said University with a rider that those persons who had earlier applied pursuant to the notification, dated 08.05.2018 need not apply again. Based upon the recommendations of the Search Committee so constituted, respondent No.6 came to be appointed vide G.O.Ms.No.63, dated 08.06.2020, as Vice Chancellor of the Dr. YSR Horticultural University for a period of three years from the date of assumption of charge, which was to expire on 29.06.2023.

7. Respondent No.6 appears to have addressed a communication, dated 16.05.2023, to the Special Chief Secretary to Government, Agriculture & Cooperation (Horti & Seri) Department, requesting that his tenure, which was to come to an end on 29.06.2023, be extended for another three years with effect from 30.06.2023 as per the Statutes of the University. The extension was sought by respondent No. 6 based upon the contributions stated to have been made by him during his tenure as such Vice Chancellor.

Responding to the request of respondent No.6, the Government issued G.O.Ms.No.29, dated 28.06.2023, ordering

        Click Here to Read the rest of this document
        1
        2
        3
        4
        5
        6
        7
        8
        9
        10
        11
        SupremeToday Portrait Ad
        supreme today icon
        logo-black

        An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

        Please visit our Training & Support
        Center or Contact Us for assistance

        qr

        Scan Me!

        India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

        For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

        whatsapp-icon Back to top