P. R. GOKULAKRISHNAN, J.

( 1 ) TWO lecturers of Colleges affiliated to respondent No. 2-University who are also Senate Members and who claim to have no personal interest in the subject matter of the present petition have felt constrained in the interest of high standards norms principles and the purity of education and educational institutions to file the present petition challenging what they claim to be arbitrary action of the respondents in the matter of procedure of appointment of the pivotal office of the Vice-Chancellor of respondent No. 2- University in the matter of recommendations of the names for the said office and also regarding the functions of the Committee in the matter of the said appointment.

( 2 ) THE factual background alleged by the petitioners is as under: Since the Academic and Executive Councils in the Gujarat University were not existing at the relevant time due to pending litigation it had not been possible to call a joint meeting of the Executive Council and the Academic Council for the purpose of nominating a member on the Committee popularly known as the Search Committee. The Vice-Chancellars of the Universities established by law in the State of Gujarat on or about 10-6-1987 submitted the name of Shri K. N. Shah as a member of the Search Committee. The Chancellor suggested the names of Shri P. Shivraj and Shri Ramanlal Joshi as the remaining two members on the Search Committee. The raid Committee thereafter met on 4-7-1987; 8 and finally on 9-7-1987. According to the petitioners the said Committee ultimately recommended six names (virtually five names) and the Registrar of the University was asked to take up the follow-up action so that a Vice-Chancellor came to be appointed in accordance with law. It is at this stage that the present petition has been filed on 12 for the following reliefs: (A) restraining the respondent-Government from implementing and acting upon the names recommended by the Committee for the purpose of appointment as Vice-Chancellor of the Gujarat University; (B) restraining the respondent-Government from appointing the Vice-Chancellor of the Gujarat University from amongst the names recommended by the Committee; (C) (if at all the appointment has been made) restraining the respondent-Government from declaring it and also restraining the respondents from allowing him to take charge of the said pose; and (D) granting any other appropriate relief.

( 3 ) CONSIDERED in the background of the Gujarat University Act 1949 it cannot be gainsaid that the office of the Vice-Chancellor is of prime importance. He is the Principal Executive and Academic Officer of the University. He is also the ex-officio Chairman of the highest authorities of the University viz. the Executive Council and the Academic Council. It is his duty to ensure that the provisions of the Act Statutes Ordinances and Regulations are faithfully observed.

( 4 ) TO ensure selection of a person to such a high ranking and pivotal office Legislature has deemed it proper to prescribe a certain well defined procedure. It can safely be assumed that the Legislature was well aware of the pros and cons of the system of direct election by the University Court as well as those of the system of direct appointment by the State Government. None of these two systems has found favour with the Legislature so far as the appointment of a Vice-Chancellor is concerned. It has therefore evolved a system which is entirely different from the above two systems in the hope that the system which it was prescribing would ensure the appointment of a Vice-Chancellor who is really independent and impartial and who would be able to do full justice to his office and act without fear or favour. The system evolved is a three-tier one. There are so to say three constituencies each of which has to elect one member on a Committee; The three constituencies are: (1) Members of the Executive Council and those of the Academic Council to jointly appoint one member on

Click Here to Read the rest of this document