Back
IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA
T.S. SIVAGNANAM, AJAY KUMAR GUPTA, JJ.
Sanat Kumar Ghosh – Petitioner
Versus
The Chancellor, University of Kalyani and Others – Respondents
WPA (P) No. 272 of 2023
Decided On : 28-06-2023
WRIT PETITION - VICE CHANCELLOR - APPOINTMENT - CONSULTATION - QUO-WARRANTO - UNIVERSITY LAWS AMENDMENT ACT, 2012 AND 2014 - VALIDITY - SEARCH COMMITTEE - UGC REGULATIONS, 2018 - APPOINTMENT OF INTERIM VICE CHANCELLORS - ORDERS DATED 1ST MARCH, 2023 - ORDERS DATED 31ST MAY, 2023 - AUTHORIZATION - DISTINCTION - KALIYANI UNIVERSITY ACT, 1981 - SECTION 9(5)(B) - APPOINTMENT VERSUS AUTHORIZATION - WRIT OF QUO-WARRANTO - JURISDICTION - PUBLIC INTEREST - UGC REGULATIONS, 2018 - REGULATION 7.3 - QUALIFICATION - WEST BENGAL UNIVERSITIES (CONTROL OF EXPENDITURE) ACT, 1976 - WEST BENGAL STATE UNIVERSITIES TERMS AND CONDITIONS OF SERVICE OF VICE CHANCELLORS RULES, 2019 - APPLICABILITY - INTERFERENCE WITH CHANCELLOR'S POWERS - SPECIAL COMMISSIONER'S LETTER DATED 12TH JUNE, 2023 - JURISDICTION - FINANCIAL SANCTION - PAY AND ALLOWANCES - UNIVERSITY OF TECHNOLOGY'S INTERPRETATION - ALLOWANCE.
Fact of the Case:
The writ petition challenges the appointment of Vice Chancellors to various Universities in West Bengal, alleging that the appointments were made without consultation with the Minister-in-charge, in violation of the University Acts and UGC Regulations. The petitioner seeks issuance of a writ of quo-warranto to declare the appointments illegal.
Finding of the Court:
1. The orders dated 31st May, 2023, authorizing certain professors to exercise powers and perform duties of Vice Chancellors, are not orders of appointment but interim arrangements to cover exigencies. 2. A writ of quo-warranto cannot lie for mere procedural lapse or error, but only when the usurper has no right to remain in public office. 3. Consultation does not mean concurrence, and the final decision rests with the consultor. 4. The Chancellor, as the appointing authority, has the power to appoint Vice Chancellors, and the manner of consultation is left to the consultor. 5. The Minister-in-charge's proposal of 27 names for interim Vice Chancellors, without initiating a dialogue or providing a panel for discussion, does not constitute effective consultation. 6. The Chancellor's selection of two names from the proposed list and authorization of others to perform Vice Chancellor duties presupposes consultation. 7. The Special Commissioner's letter dated 12th June, 2023, purporting to nullify the Chancellor's orders and withholding financial sanction, is without jurisdiction and unenforceable. 8. The incumbent professors authorized to perform Vice Chancellor duties are entitled to draw their previous pay and allowances, as well as any applicable Vice Chancellor's allowance.
Issues: 1. Whether the appointments of Vice Chancellors were made in accordance with the University Acts and UGC Regulations. 2. Whether the impugned orders are orders of appointment or interim arrangements. 3. Whether a writ of quo-warranto lies for mere procedural lapse or error. 4. Whether consultation means concurrence or the final decision rests with the consultor. 5. Whether the Minister-in-charge's proposal of 27 names constitutes effective consultation. 6. Whether the Chancellor's selection of two names and authorization of others presupposes consultation. 7. Whether the Special Commissioner has jurisdiction to nullify the Chancellor's orders and withhold financial sanction. 8. Whether the incumbent professors are entitled to draw their previous pay and allowances, as well as any applicable Vice Chancellor's allowance.
Ratio Decidendi: 1. The orders dated 31st May, 2023, authorizing certain professors to exercise powers and perform duties of Vice Chancellors, are not orders of appointment but interim arrangements to cover exigencies. 2. A writ of quo-warranto cannot lie for mere procedural lapse or error, but only when the usurper has no right to remain in public office. 3. Consultation does not mean concurrence, and the final decision rests with the consultor. 4. The Chancellor, as the appointing authority, has the power to appoint Vice Chancellors, and the manner of consultation is left to the consultor. 5. The Minister-in-charge's proposal of 27 names for interim Vice Chancellors, without initiating a dialogue or providing a panel for discussion, does not constitute effective consultation. 6. The Chancellor's selection of two names from the proposed list and authorization of others to perform Vice Chancellor duties presupposes consultation.
Final Decision: The writ petition is dismissed with a clarification that the incumbent professors authorized to perform Vice Chancellor duties shall be entitled to draw their previous pay and allowances, as well as any applicable Vice Chancellor's allowance.
JUDGMENT :
T.S. SIVAGNANAM, J.
1. This writ petition filed as a Public Interest Litigation by a professor who has 41 years of teaching experience, seeks for issuance of a writ of quo-warranto to declare that the Respondent Nos. 28 to 40 do not have a right to hold office of Vice Chancellor and to quash their appointments. The Respondent No. 1 to 13 are the Chancellors in the different Universities in the State of West Bengal who is none other than his Excellency Hon’ble Governor of West Bengal. It is submitted that the various enactments under which the Universities were established provides the methodology by which the Vice Chancellors will be appointed to the University. The petitioner would state that in 2022, the State of West Bengal appointed 24 Vice Chancellors to the 24 Universities. The said appointments as well as the validity of the West Bengal University Laws Amendment (Act), 2012 and the West Bengal Laws Amendment (Act), 2014 were challenged in a Public Interest Litigation in WPA (P) 170 of 2022. The said writ petition was allowed by judgment dated 14th March, 2023 holding that the Search Committee constituted by the Government of West Bengal did not have any Member nominated by the Chairman of the University Grants Commission (UGC), and that the Search Committees so constituted were in violation of the UGC Regulations of the year 2018. The Division Bench held that the UGC Regulations, 2018 will prevail over the provisions of the concerned State Universities Act relating to appointment of Vice Chancellors and consequently held that the appointments of the 24 Vice Chancellors were unsustainable in law. There were also other directions issued in the said writ petition as to how the Vice Chancellors have to be appointed in terms of the relevant provisions. The said order passed by the Division Bench was challenged before the Hon’ble Supreme Court and the appeal was dismissed. Thereafter the Government of West Bengal made several amendments bringing the State Universities Act in tune with the UGC Regulations, 2018, by passing the West Bengal Universities Laws (Amendment Ordinance), 2013. In the light of the judgment passed by the Division Bench, certain of the Vice Chancellors resigned and in respect of others the term of office came to an end and an order was passed appointing interim Vice Chancellors for a period of 3 months to exercise the powers and perform the duties of the Vice Chancellor as an interim measure and 28 professors were so appointed. The petitioner would state that he has come to know that the Minister-in-charge of the Department of the Higher Education, Government of West Bengal on 18th May, 2023 proposed the name of 27 persons for being appointed as Vice Chancellors for a tenure of 6 months. It is a further case of the petitioner that contrary to the proposal given by the Minister-in-charge. The Chancellor of the respondent Universities without consultation with the Minister-in-charge had made series of appointments of Vice Chancellors. In this regard, the petitioner has referred to the various enactments under which the respondent Universities were constituted and by way of illustration we refer to the Kalyani University Act, 1981. In the said Act, reference has been made to Section 9 (5) (b) and it is submitted that the said provision expressly provides that when a vacancy occurs in the office of a Vice Chancellor by reason of death, resignation or expiry of the term of his office or otherwise, then pending the appointment of a Vice Chancellor, the Chancellor in consultation with the Minister may appoint any person to exercise the powers and perform the duties of the Vice Chancellor for any period not exceeding 6 months. It is submitted that the appointment made by the Chancellor appointing the private respondent as Vice Chancellors is in contravention of the mandate as contained in Section 9 (5) (b) of the Kalyani University Act, 1981. The petitioner would further state that the Respondent Nos. 32
The UGC Regulations, 2018 prevail over the conflicting provisions of the concerned State Universities Act relating to the appointment of the Vice-Chancellor.
The appointment of Vice-Chancellors must comply with statutory provisions and UGC regulations, ensuring lawful and independent decision-making by the Chancellor.
First choice in Section 13(7) of “Act” is Vice Chancellor of any other University in Kerala; and admittedly, all such persons are fully qualified in terms of both experience and educational qualifica....
The power of reappointment of the Vice Chancellor was held to be vested with the Chancellor and not the State government, and the State government's order re-appointing the VC was held to be in viola....
(1) Writ of Quo warranto – Writ of quo warranto can be issued where an appointment has not been made in accordance with law – Quo warranto is directed to such person who is required to show by what a....
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the State had the authority to pass appropriate directions under Section 19 of the West Bengal Universities and Colleges (Administration and R....
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
