HC stays 10 new TN laws on vicechancellor appointments

HC stays 10 new TN laws on vicechancellor appointments 

State Opposes Interim Orders On PIL

By Advocate Sureshkumar.K@timesofindia.com 22.05.2025

Chennai : The operation of Tamil Nadu’s 10 state university laws, the passage of which by Supreme Court triggered a rare presidential reference plus a renewed Centre-state power tussle, was on Wednesday stayed by a vacation court of Madras high court. The bench of Justice G R Swaminathan and Justice V Lakshminarayanan passed the interim orders amid objections made by Tamil Nadu advocategeneral P S Raman and senior advocate P Wilson, both representing the state. The public interest writ petition filed by advocate K Venkatachalapathy of Tirunelveli assailed the laws saying they were contrary to the objectives of regulations and functions of the University Grants Commission (UGC). “Through Regulation 7.3 of the UGC Regulations for teaching staff, the commission granted power to the Chancellor (governor) to appoint the VCs. However, the state, through the amendments, replaced the power of the Chancellor with the govt, which is contrary to the process stipulated for appointing the VCs,” he said. “The state universities are recognised as universities within Section 2 (f) of the UGC Act and are also recognised by the commission under the applicable regulations. Therefore, any amendments made by the state affecting such universities, especially in areas already covered by the regulation concerning the appointment of VCs, constitute a violation of the constitutional distribution of powers,” he said. 

As announced by chief minister M K Stalin a few days ago, the Tamil Nadu govt moved Supreme Court seeking immediate release of ₹2,151 crore by the Union govt under the Samagra Shiksha Scheme, reports Sureshkumar K . The state accused the Union govt of coercive federal overreach by linking the disbursal of funds to TN’s acceptance of National Education Policy (NEP) 2020 and the PM SHRI Schools scheme. Tamil Nadu wanted Supreme Court to order the recovery of ₹2,291 crore within a time frame to be fixed by the court, together with future interest at the rate of 6% per annum on the principal sum of ₹2,151 crore. The non-release of funds would affect as many as 43,94,906 students, 2,21,817 teachers and 32,701 staff members, Tamil Nadu said. 

‘Education should be in hands of authority above politics’ Senior advocate Dama Seshadri Naidu, representing the petitioner, contended on Wednesday that universities must be protected from political powers. The chancellor is apolitical like a Speaker of an assembly, and, therefore, education should be in the hands of an authority above politics, he submitted. 

In response, advocate general Raman said, “a legislation passed by a state Assembly can be stayed only when there is glaring unconstitutionality or if it is manifestly arbitrary. In the present case, a state legislation prevails over the regulations framed by the UGC.” So long as it does not contravene a law legislated by Parliament, the state law prevails, he said. 

The amendments got indirect assent from the governor due to the interference of the Supreme Court. The stand of the state is that the UGC does not have the power to constitute a search committee to appoint vice chancellors, Raman added. Wilson sought adjournment saying a petition to transfer of all the related cases to the Supreme Court was pending in the apex court and that arguing the matter now before the high court would leave the pending pleas infructuous. Asserting that there was no urgency to hear the PIL in a vacation sitting, both requested the court to adjourn the hearing and provide time for the state to file its counter. However, refusing any adjournment, the bench heard the petition until 7pm on  Wednesday and passed the interim order. In his submissions, Wilson said the governor was waging a war against the state govt. “The PIL is politically motivated. Except for a grudge to stay the selection process, there is no urgency in the issue,” he said. “Only the process for the appointment of vice-chancellors has commenced. The last date to receive applications is only on June 5. There is no urgency; the apprehension of the petitioner that something will happen tomorrow is unfounded,” the AG said. Wilson said the petitioner, a BJP district secretary from Tirunelveli, chose to move this particular second vacation court, and added: “This is forum shopping. It will be judicial impropriety if the petitioner is allowed to argue,” Wilson said.