M. SUNDAR, J.

We propose to dispose of both the aforesaid writ petitions by this common order as the issues raised are common/similar and the prayers sought overlap, with one limb of the prayer being common to both writ petitions.

2. The pivotal issue in these two writ petitions is appointment of Vice Chancellor of Madurai Kamaraj University. Both these writ petitions, which have been filed as Public Interest Litigations ('PILs' for brevity), question the appointment of one Dr.P.P.Chellathurai, as Vice-Chancellor of Madurai Kamaraj University. To be noted, in one of the two PILs i.e., W.P.No.14705 of 2017 (filed by one Traffic Dr. Ramaswamy), there is a prayer qua appointment of Vice-Chancellor of Madras University also.

3. It is necessary to set out a thumbnail sketch of facts for better appreciation of our order. We do so under the caption ‘Facts in a nutshell’ infra.

4. FACTS IN A NUTSHELL

4(a) Though the caption is 'facts in a nutshell', as mentioned supra, we shall be setting out only a thumbnail sketch of facts, which according to us, are absolutely essential (sans unnecessary details and particulars) for appreciating this order.

4(b) Madurai Kamaraj University (hereinafter referred to as ‘MKU’ for brevity) was established by the Government of Tamil Nadu by enacting Madurai Kamaraj University Act, 1965 (No.33 of 1965), which is hereinafter referred to as 'MKU Act' for brevity. The Governor of Tamil Nadu is exofficio Chancellor of MKU and the administration of MKU vests in the Vice-Chancellor.

4(c) Vice Chancellor of MKU shall be appointed by the Chancellor from and out of a panel of three names to be recommended by a committee, which goes by the name 'Search Committee'. The Search Committee shall consist of three persons. The three persons in the Search Committee shall be nominated by the Senate, the Syndicate and the Chancellor of MKU (To be noted, one each). The Vice Chancellor, who is so appointed, shall be a whole time officer of MKU and will hold office for a period of three years.

4(d) This being a thumbnail sketch of facts, suffice to say that the mode of selection of Vice Chancellor of MKU is set out in Sections 11 and 12 of MKU Act. Besides the MKU Act, there is a reference to what is referred to as 'Statutes' and a book which says MKU Calender Volume 1 was placed before us. These 'Statues' are traceable to sub-sections (1) and (2) of Sections 17, 30 and 31 of MKU Act and Chapter V of these Statues captioned 'Vice Chancellor' is also of relevance here.

4(e) In the instant case, the search committee of three members for MKU was constituted in the aforesaid manner and the same was published by the State Government vide G.O (ID) No.91, Higher Education (H2) Department dated 06.04.2015. The Search Committee comprised of Dr.C.Murukadas (Chancellor’s Nominee), Dr.Harish L.Mehta (Syndicate Nominee) and Prof. Mu.Ramaswamy (Senate Nominee). This Search Committee held a meeting on 24.04.2015.

4(f) Alleging that the functioning of the convenor is high-handed, Dr. Mu. Ramaswamy resigned, necessitating reconstitution of the Search Committee. The Search Committee was reconstituted and in place of Dr.Mu.Ramaswamy (Senate Nominee), Dr.G.Ramakrishnan was made a member of the Search Committee and the same was published in the Gazette by the Government of Tamil Nadu vide G.O. (D) No.407 (Higher Education-H2 Department) dated 20.12.2016. To be noted, the members of this reconstituted Search Committee have been arrayed as Respondents 5, 6 and 7 in one of the two instant writ petitions, i.e., W.P (MD) No.12788 of 2017 filed by M.Lionel Antony Raj.

4(g) For the sake of further convenience and clarity, we are referring to the PIL being W.P (MD) No.12788 of 2017, as 'Lionel Antony Raj’s PIL' and the other PIL i.e., W.P.No.14705 of 2017, as 'Traffic Ramasamy’s PIL'.

4(h) Also to be noted, wherever we refer to the parties to this proceedings by rank, it is by their rank in Lionel Antony Raj’s PIL, which has also been argued by consent of all c