Ramachandran Nair, J.

1. The connected Writ Appeals are filed against common judgment of the learned Single Judge vacating the orders of nomination of Senate members by the Chancellor under the category reserved for Heads of Departments of the University as provided under Section 17 (13) of the Kerala University Act, 1974 (hereinafter called "the Act"). We have heard Senior counsel appearing for the appellants and counsel appearing for some of the contesting parties, all of whom took notice on admission and argued the matter.

2. Writ Petition was filed by the Head of the Department of Aquatic Biology and Fisheries which is a Department under the University of Kerala, first respondent in both the Writ Appeals, challenging appointment of seven Heads of Departments of the University as Senate Members by the Chancellor based on the recommendation of the Vice Chancellor. The learned Single Judge found that the selection by the Vice Chancellor was not in accordance with the statutory provision and all what the Chancellor did was to approve the list of candidates sent by the Vice Chancellor for selection. The appellants' case is that the Vice Chancellor prepared the list of eligible Heads of Departments strictly in terms of the statutory provision and the Chancellor accepted the same. In order to consider the controversy, we have to necessarily refer to the relevant provision of the Act which is as follows:

"S.17.Senate:- The Senate shall consist of the following members, namely:-

..........

..........

(13) Seven heads of University departments who are not otherwise members of the Senate, to be nominated in the order of seniority by the Chancellor by rotation".

The object of the above provision is obviously to have the various Departments of the University represented in the Senate through the Heads of the Departments. Since all the Departments cannot be represented at a time, representation by rotation is provided based on the seniority. The Act came into force on 27.7.1974 and when the first nomination was made on 30.12.1975, the University had only 24 departments. However, in the course of last several years the number of Departments increased and as of now, the University has 41 Departments. Going by the above provision, at a time only 7 Departments can have representation in the Senate through the Heads of Departments and the tenure of the Senate members is two years. So much so, it takes six terms i.e. around 12 years, to have every Department represented once in the Senate. In other words, in a cycle of every 12 years, each Department would have represented once in the Senate. Nomination by rotation and in the order of seniority referred to in the above provision obviously means that nomination should be based on the seniority of the Departments or in other words, the first established Department will get first nomination in preference to the Departments established later. Once a full cycle is over providing representation to all the Departments, the next cycle should start from the top and the same should continue. From the details furnished to us what is clear is that so far nominations have been made from Heads of Departments on an erratic manner without following any system. Going by the statistics furnished, we notice that the last representation of the first Department i.e. Aquatic Biology and Fisheries, the Head of which is the petitioner in the W.P.(C), in the Senate was in 1986 which means that for quarter of a century that department had no representation. Going by the last year of nomination of the Heads of Departments of various Departments in the Senate, we notice that the Departments of Geology and Linguistics had no representation in the Senate for the last 28 years. The position is almost same for Departments of Mathematics, Biochemistry, Education, Psychology etc. where the Departments had no representation for the last over 20 years. While the case of the first respondent who is the petitioner i