'Unsustainable In Law, Non-Adherence To Procedure': Kerala High Court On Ex-Guv's Appointment Of VC To APJ Abdul Kalam Technological University

The Chancellor had relied on Dr. Premachandran Keezhoth and Another v the Chancellor Kannur University (2023) to argue that he was entitled to make appointment without any interference from the Government. However, the Court held that the case was concerned with the Kannur University Act and was not applicable in the presenting scenario.

The Court however held that since the appointment was made only for a period of six months and the term was set to expire by 27^th May, it need not interfere with the appointment at this point. The Court observed that the frequent changes in the person holding the office may not be conducive to the University and its students.

The Court directed the Government to take steps to recommend the Chancellor names of persons having prescribed qualification under UGC to be appointed as the VC of the University until an appointment is made on regular basis.

The Court following the judgment in State of Kerala v Chancellor (2023) held that the provisions in the 2015 Act is valid unless it is contrary to the UGC Regulations. The High Court rejected the argument that State of Kerala (2023) was not a good law asit is contrary to the Supreme Court decision in Prof. (Dr.) Sreejith P. S. V Dr. Rajasree M. S. and Others (2022). The Court observed that Dr. Sreejith has laid down that the UGC Regulations will have supremacy over a contrary State Legislation but does not go against the judgment in State of Kerala v Chancellor. The Court clarified that the State has to make sure that only person who qualify as per the UGC Regulations is recommended to the post of VC even if is on a temporary basis.

Background of the Case

The Supreme Court in Dr. Sreejith v Dr. Rajasree declared that the appointment of Dr. Rajasree M. S to the post of Vice Chancellor of the Technological University was illegal. Subsequently, the Government recommended Saji Gopinath, the VC of Digital University of Kerala to be given the charge of temporary VC of the technological university. This recommendation was not accepted by the Chancellor which in turn led to Government recommending the name of Principal Secretary of the Higher Educational Department to act as the VC. The Chancellor, however, went forward and appointed Dr. Ciza Thomas as the VC. This action was challenged by the Government before the High Court which was initially dismissed by the Single Judge. However, on appeal the Division Bench held that the State can recommend other names to replace Ciza Thomas. Subsequent to this, Government forwarded a panel of names containing 3 names to be considered for appointment. The Chancellor sought a clarification from the Government whether it was standing by the initial recommendation of Saji Gopinath or the panel of 3 names. To this, the Government replied by sending a new panel of names including the name of Dr. Saji Gopinath. On March 2023. Saji Gopinath was appointed as the temporary VC.

As the term of Saji Gopinath came to an end, the Government issued a communication for the Chancellor's consideration. However, the Governor held that he had discretion in the matter of appointing VC based on the Supreme Court judgment in on Dr. Premachandran Keezhoth and Another v the Chancellor Kannur University (2023). Based on this claim, the Chancellor appointed Dr. K. Sivaprasad as the VC which was challenged by the Government in the instant writ petition.

Counsel for the Petitioner: Advocates Asok M. Cherian (Addl. AG), N. Manoj Kumar (State Attorney), V. Manu (Spl. GP to AG)

Counsel for the Respondents: Advocates S. Prasanth (SC), K. R. Ganesh, Nisha George, P. Sreekumar (Sr.), Silpa Sreekumar, George Poonthottam (Sr.), Kavya Varma M. M.

Case No: WP(C) 42527 of 2024

Case Title: State of Kerala v the Chancellor and Others

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Ker) 280