Legal Scrutiny and Approval of Dr. Raveendran’s Vice-Chancellorship Renewal by the Supreme Court
TITLE: DR. PREMACHANDRAN KEEZHOTH & ANR. V. THE CHANCELLOR KANNUR UNIVERSITY & ORS.
CITATION: CIVIL APPEAL NO. 7700 OF 2023
DECIDED ON: 30 NOVEMBER 2023
CORAM: JUSTICE DHANANJAYA Y CHANDRACH, JUSTICE JB PARDIWALA, JUSTICE MANOJ MISRA
Facts of the Case
On November 22, 2021, the Minister for Higher Education recommended the reappointment of Dr. Gopinath Raveendran as the Vice-Chancellor of Kannur University for a second term. Simultaneously, the notification inviting applications for the selection of a new Vice-Chancellor was withdrawn. On November 23, 2021, Dr. Gopinath Raveendran was reappointed as the Vice-Chancellor for a four-year term. The reappointment faced legal challenge based on allegations that Dr. Raveendran exceeded the age limit for the Vice-Chancellor position and that the prescribed appointment procedure was not followed.
Issues Involved
Whether the reappointment of Dr. Gopinath Raveendran as the Vice-Chancellor of Kannur University was valid. Whether the age limit for the initial appointment of a Vice-Chancellor applies to the reappointment. Whether the procedure for reappointment should follow the same process as the initial appointment. Whether the Chancellor’s power of reappointment was surrendered. Whether the UGC Regulations take precedence over state laws in the appointment procedure for a Vice-Chancellor.
Legal Provisions
Relevant provisions of the Kannur University Act and regulations governing the appointment and reappointment of Vice-Chancellors. Section 10(9) specifying the age limit for the appointment of a Vice-Chancellor. UGC Regulations outlining the procedure for the appointment of Vice-Chancellors, including the constitution of a Search-cum-Selection Committee.
Court’s Observation and Analysis
The High Court, in its initial ruling, dismissed the challenge, holding that the reappointment was valid. The Court concluded that reappointment is permissible for tenure posts, and the outer age limit for the initial appointment does not apply to reappointment. It emphasized that the reappointment process need not replicate the fresh appointment process, as stipulated by the relevant provisions. The Court also determined that the Chancellor’s power of reappointment is subject to the UGC Regulations, which, in this case, did not explicitly address the reappointment of a Vice-Chancellor. Furthermore, the Court discussed the principles of administrative law, stressing the need for discretionary powers to be exercised reasonably and in line with community standards. The judgment highlighted the distinction between the Governor’s personal capacity and his role as the ex officio Chancellor of the university. It noted that interference from the State Government in the reappointment process was deemed illegal.
“PRIME LEGAL is a full-service law firm that has won a National Award and has more than 20 years of experience in an array of sectors and practice areas. Prime legal fall into a category of best law firm, best lawyer, best family lawyer, best divorce lawyer, best divorce law firm, best criminal lawyer, best criminal law firm, best consumer lawyer, best civil lawyer.”
Written by- Komal Goswami