IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
A. MUHAMED MUSTAQUE, SHOBA ANNAMMA EAPEN, JJ.
State Of Kerala Represented By The Additional Secretary To The Government Higher Education Department - Appellant
Versus
The Chancellor, APJ Abdul Kalam Technological University and Ors. – Respondents
WA No. 1847 Of 2022
Decided On : 16-02-2023
APJ Abdul Kalam Technological University Act, 2015 - Section 13(7), 13 (2), 13 - Maintenance of Standards in Higher Education,2018 - University Grants Commission (Minimum Qualifications for Appointment of Teachers and other Academic Staff in Universities and Colleges and other measures for the Maintenance of Standards in Higher Education) Regulations, 2010 - Appeal - Appointment - Post of Vice-Chancellor - Whether any other name is to be recommended to replace her or not - whether such appointee is to be replaced or not - quo warranto cannot be issued for mere procedural lapse or error, but can be issued only when the usurper is found to have no semblance of right to remain in the public office. (Para 13 ).
Finding of the Court: It is appropriate for the State Government, while recommending such names, to follow the procedure of sending a panel of a minimum of three names, in light of the UGC Regulation as far as the regular appointment is concerned. Though it is not related to temporary appointments, the very objective of the UGC Regulations is to eschew arbitrariness and to ensure fair play while recommending such names. Therefore, we are of the view that the Government is free to suggest a panel of a minimum of three other names to the Chancellor to replace the 3rd respondent.
Result: Writ appeal disposed of.
JUDGMENT :
(A. Muhamed Mustaque, J.)
1. This appeal is filed by the State Government.
2. The matter relates to an appointment to the post of Vice-Chancellor in terms of Section 13(7) of the A.P.J. Abdul Kalam Technological University Act, 2015 (for short, “the Act”). The incumbent Vice-Chancellor, viz., Dr.Rajasree M.S., consequent upon the upholding of a challenge by the apex court, vacated the office on 21.10.2022. Section 13(7) of the Act permits the appointment of a Vice-Chancellor for a period not exceeding six months in the aggregate till the regular Vice-Chancellor assumes office. The Chancellor, APJ Abdul Kalam Technological University (for short, “the University”), who is the Governor of the State, appointed Prof. (Dr.) Ciza Thomas (3rd respondent) without there being a recommendation of the State Government as contemplated under Section 13(7) of the Act. Challenging her appointment as above for the interregnum, the State Government has come up before this Court with the writ petition for the reliefs of quo warranto, writ of certiorari, mandamus etc. The learned Single Judge, who heard the matter, refused to issue quo warranto. Other reliefs sought by the State Government were also not allowed. The learned Single Judge also issued certain directions, which we will advert to, at a later stage of the judgment. Aggrieved by the judgment of the learned Single Judge, the State has come up in appeal.
3. We have heard Sri.K.Gopalakrishna Kurup, the learned Advocate General of the State, assisted by Adv. Sri.V.Manu, learned Senior Government Pleader; Dr.S.Gopakumaran Nair, the learned senior counsel for respondents 1 and 2; Sri.George Poonthottam, learned senior counsel appearing for the 3rd respondent; and Sri.R.Sakaranarayanan, learned Additional Solicitor General for the 4th respondent, assisted by Sri. S. Krishnamoorthy, learned Central Government Counsel.
4. The issue we have to decide falls within the statutory provisions of the Act. At the outset, we must note that there is no UGC Regulation governing the appointment of the Vice-Chancellor temporarily till a regular appointment is made. It is profitable to refer to Section 13(7) of the Act, which reads thus;
(i) where the committee appointed under sub-section (1) is unable to recommend any name within the time-limit specified by the Chancellor;
(ii) where vacancy occurs in the office of the Vice-Chancellor because of death,, resignation or otherwise and it cannot be filled; up conveniently and expeditiously in accordance with the provisions of sub-sections (1) to (5) ;
(iii) where the vacancy in the office of the Vice-Chancellor arises temporarily because of leave, illness or of any other causes;
(iv) where the term of office of the Vice-Chancellor expires;: or
(v) where there is any other emergency:
Provided that the person so appointed shall cease to hold such office on the date on which the Vice-Chancellor resumes office,”
5. Section 13(7) of the Act has three parts. The first part refers to the recommendation, the authority of the Government to recommend names; the second part refers to the nature of the persons, who can be recommended for appointment as a Vice-Chancellor by virtue of their office; the third part refers to the power of the Chancellor to appoint the Vice-Chancellor. The power of the State Government, as referred to under the statutory provisions to recommend names, cannot be doubted inasmuch as that the State has legislative competence under Entry 25 of Concurrent List III of the Constitution of India. The phrase “recommendation” in this context means the authority to initiate
Municipal Corporation of Delhi v. Qimat Rai Gupta (2007) 7 SCC 309
There is no legal right for an appointee to continue for a fixed period.
The appointment of Vice-Chancellors must comply with statutory provisions and UGC regulations, ensuring lawful and independent decision-making by the Chancellor.
It is trite and settled law that a writ of quo warranto can be issued in the case of appointment of like nature which is contrary to the statute.
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....
The appointment of a temporary Vice-Chancellor must comply with statutory procedures and UGC qualifications, requiring government recommendations as per the APJ Abdul Kalam Technological University A....
The UGC Regulations, 2018 prevail over the conflicting provisions of the concerned State Universities Act relating to the appointment of the Vice-Chancellor.
(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....
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.