CHENNAI: The Anna University has moved the Madras High Court seeking to quash the order of the governor-chancellor revoking the suspension of former vice-chancellor R Velraj, who is facing action following allegations of irregularities and corruption in granting affiliation to self-financing colleges and the appointment of fake teaching faculties.
Justice M Dandapani, before whom the petition filed by the registrar came up for hearing on Tuesday, admitted the petition and directed the Governor-Chancellor and Velraj to file their response.
Velraj served as the V-C from August 11, 2021, to August 9, 2024, and thereafter as a professor in the mechanical engineering department. He faced allegations of corruption and maladministration in granting affiliation to self-financing engineering colleges and appointment of ineligible persons as professors of eminence, according to the petition.
The syndicate, on July 31, 2025, passed a resolution to place him under suspension and not to permit him to retire from service, apart from initiating disciplinary action under the university statutes.
Based on the proceedings of the convenor committee on the same day, the registrar suspended Velraj and retained him in service pending inquiry.
He preferred an appeal directly before the governor-chancellor, who issued the impugned order on September 5,2025, invoking Clause 4 (vi) of the Anna University Statutes on Disciplinary Procedure to set aside the suspension and permitted him to retire with full benefits, the petition stated.
It noted, “The Anna University Act, 1978 and the Statutes constitute, a complete code governing disciplinary proceedings and the Act does not confer any appellate, supervisory or revisional power upon the Governor-Chancellor over orders passed by the syndicate, which is the apex statutory body of the University.” The impugned order is ultra vires, without jurisdiction, void ab initio and null in law, it added.
Advocate Richardson Wilson, representing the University, submitted that the governor-chancellor cannot act as an appellate authority against an order passed by the syndicate, the apex body governing the university, and that he did not give adequate opportunity of hearing to the syndicate or the convenor committee before passing the impugned orders.