THIRUVANANTHAPURAM: Is the Chancellor (Governor) empowered to constitute search committees, as laid down in the UGC regulations, to select permanent vice-chancellors in universities if the universities or the government refuse to nominate their representatives to the panels? The High Court’s decision on the matter will be crucial in ending the deadlock in nine universities where temporary vice-chancellors are presently calling the shots.
With the escalating spat between the governor and the government further delaying the appointment of permanent vice-chancellors in universities, a writ petition before the High Court has assumed significance. The petition, by academic economist Mary George, has been filed in the wake of the Supreme Court recently explaining the powers of the Chancellor in the matter of appointment of vice-chancellors.
According to the petition, there is no authoritative pronouncement by the SC or the HC on the question regarding the steps that can be taken by the Chancellor when there is a refusal on the part of the University and the state government to nominate their representatives for constituting the search committee.
While the UGC regulations stipulate that a search-cum-selection committee should be constituted, it does not lay down its exact composition, except that one of the members should be a UGC representative. However, the Acts of the universities prescribe a three-member panel comprising nominees of the Chancellor, UGC and the senate/syndicate / governing council of the university or a representative of the state government.
The governor had repeatedly directed both the government and universities to give their representatives to the search committees to choose VCs but the directives were not complied with. Interestingly, the Kerala University senate chose not to nominate its representative, disregarding a High Court order to do so. In KTU, a temporary VC is continuing for over eight months though the varsity act stipulates only a six-month tenure.
“An ad-hoc or temporary vice-chancellor, irrespective of his or her ability cannot command the same authority, administratively and legally, which a regular vice-chancellor can command,” said the petitioner. Besides, the continuance of vice-chancellors appointed on a temporary basis in the universities is detrimental to the interests of the students and the academic bodies, she pointed out.
The government reportedly prefers the status quo to prevail on the matter as it has already passed a bill seeking to alter the composition of search committees from three to five. This legislation is among the seven Bills that the governor had reserved for Presidential reference. Meanwhile, the governor’s camp is hopeful over recent judgments of the SC that had emphasised the supremacy of the UGC regulations over the provisions of state enactments (university laws).