CHENNAI: A vacation bench of the Madras High Court, which temporarily stayed the operation of the 10 amendment Acts that took away the powers to appoint vice-chancellors (V-C) to state-run universities from Governor-Chancellor, in its order, reasoned that it cannot “shut its eyes on the unconstitutionality of the Acts”.
The 10 Acts were granted “deemed assent” by the Supreme Court on April 8 in its verdict in the case filed by the Tamil Nadu government against Governor R N Ravi, following which the state government notified the Acts on April 11.
The bench passed the interim orders based on the petitions filed by a BJP functionary and advocate K Venkatachalapathy, whose main contention was that the amendments were repugnant to Regulation 7.3 of the UGC Regulations on Minimum Qualifications for Appointment of Teachers and Other Academic Staff in Universities and Colleges, 2018, dealing with appointment of V-Cs.
In its order, the bench of justices G R Swaminathan and V Lakshminarayanan said there was no legal hurdle for the high court to subject the amendment Acts to judicial review since the SC has not tested the constitutionality of the legislations in its judgment. Moreover, the bench observed that there is no stay on the applicability of the particular UGC regulation.
“The unconstitutionality and repugnancy vitiating the impugned amendment Acts is so glaring and obvious that we cannot shut our eyes. We are convinced the amendments are ex-facie unconstitutional. If an unconstitutional process is allowed to proceed, it would cause irreparable injury and public interest would suffer,” the bench said.
It further said when the repugnancy is “obvious and admitted”, it is “our judicial duty to apply the law declared by the SC in as many as four recent decisions (regarding the applicability of UGC regulations”. The presumption of constitutionality which the amended Acts carried stood displaced the moment these decisions of the SC were cited, the bench said.
On TN’s writ petition in SC questioning the validity of the 2018 UGC Regulations, the bench said since no interim order has been obtained and since SC has not suspended the operation and applicability of Regulation 7.3, they have to proceed on the footing that they are in force.
It noted that the Additional Solicitor General of India’s submission on behalf of UGC makes it clear that the state universities have been receiving financial assistance from UGC. The 2018 Regulations have been adopted by TN through an order dated January 11, 2021, the bench said.
“Having adopted the 2018 UGC Regulations, the state cannot adopt a procedure that militates against the said regulations in the matter of appointment of V-Cs,” it said.
On submission of senior counsel P Wilson, representing the Higher Education department, that a petition regarding UGC Regulations is pending at the SC and a memo had been filed to transfer the present PIL to the apex court, the bench said, “We know that we have to give the highest respect to any decision of the SC. We do not need lectures from P Wilson on this score,” the bench said.
On the submission that the vacation bench shall not show urgency in hearing the PIL without giving ample time to the government to respond, the bench said judges can be on vacation but not the courts and access to justice should always be available.
Appavu asks if HC order based on RSS ideas
Tirunelveli: Tamil Nadu Assembly Speaker M Appavu on Thursday said he was informed by a few advocates and former justices that the case filed against bills enabling Tamil Nadu government to appoint vice-chancellors was a ‘planned one’.
Addressing reporters, Appavu said, “Like all of us residing in the southern parts of the State, the petitioner Venkatachalapathy, a native of Tirunelveli, should have filed his PIL before the Madurai Bench of the Madras High Court.
However, he filed the case in the Principal Bench in Chennai, and it was accepted even after advocate P Wilson informed the court that he had mentioned it before the Supreme Court. Several people are asking if the High Court order is based on Constitution or RSS ideology.”