Supreme Court Issues Notice On Tamil Nadu Govt's Plea Against HC's Stay Of Amendments On Governor's Power To Appoint VCs

The Supreme Court today issued notice on a plea filed by the Tamil Nadu government against Madras High Court's stay of its legislative amendments taking away the Governor's power to appoint Vice Chancellors of state-run Universities.

A bench of Justices PS Narasimha and R Mahadevan passed the order and tagged the case with similar matter(s) pending before the Court. Further, notice was issued to the respondents on the state's prayer for interim relief and liberty given to the state to mention the cases for early hearing.

To recap, the subject amendments took away the power to appoint VCs from the Governor and vested it in the state government. Challenging these amendments, respondent No.1-K Venkatachalapathy approached the Madras High Court. He claimed that the 12 amendments brought in by the state government were repugnant to the Central Law ie, the UGC Regulations.

On May 21, the High Court passed an interim order staying the amendments, which were brought in pursuant to the Supreme Court judgment in the TN Governor case (which defined the scope of powers of the Governor). This was despite the TN Higher Education Department informing the Court that the state's petition for transfer of the case was pending before the Supreme Court.

Aggrieved, the state filed the present petition.

Background

The petition before the High Court challenged a series of legislative amendments passed by the State of Tamil Nadu, whereby powers of appointing the Vice-Chancellor were transferred from the Governor to the state government.

Filed by respondent No.1, the said petition claimed that the 12 amendments brought in by the state government were repugnant to the Central Law ie, the UGC Regulations. As per him, the UGC Regulations mandate that the Vice-Chancellors be appointed by the Chancellor from a panel recommended by the Search Committee and by vesting this power in the State Government, the amendments were overriding the role of the Chancellor.

The matter was heard by the High Court on May 21, when the Tamil Nadu Higher Education Department (TNHED) informed that the state's transfer petition was likely be taken up by the Supreme Court in 2-3 days and urged that the case before the High Court be deferred. The State Advocate General also opposed the prayer for stay, pointing out that the Supreme Court has ruled against staying of legislation as a matter of course unless found to be ex facie illegal.

Notably, the TNHED also contended that the Gazette notification relied on by the writ-petitioner(s) was a forged one and not the one passed by the State. It suggested that a CB-CID enquiry be conducted to investigate how such a forged gazette was filed before the Court.

The High Court, however, rejected the plea for deferment, heard the writ-petitioners and ordered stay of the subject amendments. Aggrieved, the state approached the Supreme Court.

Appearance: Senior Advocates Dr Abhishek Manu Singhvi, Rakesh Dwivedi and P Wilson, AoR Misha Rohatgi (for State)

Case Title: THE STATE OF TAMIL NADU AND ANR. Versus K. VENKATACHALAPATHY @KUTTY AND ORS., SLP(C) No. 17220/2025