Kerala Governor Rajendra Arlekar on Sunday questioned the Supreme Court’s December 11 decision about the selection of vice-chancellors to two universities, asserting that this authority rested with the chancellor under the University Grants Commission Act, Live Law reported.
The governor is the ex-officio chancellor of state universities.
Arlekar said that the “trend” of courts making appointments despite the chancellor having the authority to do so was not correct.
On December 11, the Supreme Court ruled that it would pick the vice-chancellors to Kerala University of Digital Sciences and APJ Abdul Kalam Technological University amid a stalemate between the state government and the governor over the appointments.
The Supreme Court appointed a committee headed by retired Justice Sudhanshu Dhulia to recommend names for the posts as no consensus had emerged.
On Sunday, at an event in Thiruvananthapuram, Arlekar criticised the tendency of one institution to usurp the role of another in a democracy, The Hindu reported.
The power to amend the Constitution was vested in Parliament and the elected legislature, and the courts were there to “interpret the Constitution and not to amend the Constitution”, he added.
Noting that the authority to appoint the vice-chancellor rested with the chancellor, the governor added that this was also upheld in a previous verdict issued by the Supreme Court in 2023.
Arlekar was referring to a case pertaining to Kannur University in which the re-appointment of the vice-chancellor was quashed on the ground that there was “unwarranted interference by the government”, Live Law reported.
The top court was now overlooking such provisions, the governor said.
Arlekar said that such actions amounted to judicial overreach.
The case stems from a notification issued by the former governor on November 27, 2024, appointing Ciza Thomas and K Sivaprasad as interim vice-chancellors of the digital university and the technological university.
On May 19, a single bench of the Kerala High Court struck down both appointments but allowed the incumbents to continue until May 27 to avoid disruption.
A division bench of the High Court later upheld the ruling, saying the governor could appoint temporary vice-chancellors for only up to six months, and only on the basis of recommendations from the state government.
The High Court also directed the state government to propose names of qualified candidates, as prescribed by the University Grants Commission, for temporary appointments until permanent vice-chancellors were selected.
The state government then submitted a panel of three nominees for each post.
However, instead of appointing from the panel, the governor approached the Supreme Court.
On July 31, the Supreme Court said that the Kerala governor could appoint temporary vice-chancellors to both universities until permanent appointments were made.
While issuing the notification for the reappointment of Thomas and Sivaprasad on August 1, Arlekar cited the Supreme Court order.
Subsequently, the Kerala government in August moved the Supreme Court challenging Arlekar’s decision to appoint Thomas and Sivaprasad as interim vice-chancellors.
You’ve read Scroll.
Now help sustain it
Scroll is funded by readers, not corporate owners. If you believe our work matters, support our newsroom. Become a member today!
We’re not driven by clicks or corporate interests – just honest, independent reporting. Keep us going. Support Scroll today!