Tamil Nadu Govt Approaches Supreme Court Seeking Transfer Of Plea In Madras High Court Against University Law Amendments

The Supreme Court today issued notice on Tamil Nadu government's plea to transfer to the Apext Court a PIL pending before the Madras High Court against certain state laws which took away the Governor's power to appoint Vice-Chancellors of State-run Universities.

A bench of Justices Surya Kant and N Kotiswar Singh passed the order, after hearing Senior Advocate Dr Abhishek Manu Singhvi (for TN), who pointed out that without notice having been issued, the University Grants Commission had already filed its response. Considering the advance filing of UGC's counter-affidavit, the bench formally issued notice to the respondents.

To recap briefly, the subject amendments took away the power to appoint VCs from the Governor and vested it in the state government. On May 21, the High Court stayed the said state 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). Tamil Nadu government has challenged the stay order by way of a special leave petition, on which the Supreme Court recently issued notice.

Tamil Nadu government seeks transfer of the PIL from the High Court to the Supreme Court, as similar cases are already pending before the latter. One of these pertains to Tamil Nadu government's challenge to 3 notifications unilaterally issued by the Governor for constituting search-and-selection committees for the appointment of VCs in Bharathiar University, Tamil Nadu Teachers Education University and Madras University. During a hearing in January, 2025, a bench led by Justice JB Pardiwala orally indicated in this case that if the issue regarding appointment of VCs was not resolved by the next date, then the Court would resolve it.

Background

The PIL before the High Court challenges 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.

The writ-petitioner (respondent No.1 before Supreme Court) claims 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 High Court heard the matter 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. Against the stay order, Tamil Nadu government approached the Supreme Court.

Appearance: Senior Advocates Dr AM Singhvi and P Wilson

Case Title: THE STATE OF TAMIL NADU AND ANR. Versus K VENKATACHALAPTHY @ KUTTY AND ORS., T.P.(C) No. 1511/2025

Click Here To Read/Download Order