Kerala High Court
Sabu Thomas vs The Chancellor on 24 October, 2022
CR
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN
MONDAY, THE 24TH DAY OF OCTOBER 2022 / 2ND KARTHIA, 1944
WP(C) NO. 33820 OF 2022
PETITIONER:
SABU THOMAS, AGED 62, S/O. THOMAS,
VICE CHANCELLOR,
MAHATMA GANDHI UNIVERSITY, KOTTAYAM,
RESIDING AT CHATHUKULAM HOUSE,
PERUMPAIKADU, KOTTAYAM - 16.
BY ADVS. SRI.ELVIN PETER P.J.
K.R.GANESH
GOURI BALAGOPAL
SREELEKSHMI A.S.
ABHIJITH.K.ANIRUDHAN
RESPONDENTS:
1 THE CHANCELLOR, MAHATMA GANDHI UNIVERSITY,
PRIYADARSHINI HILLS, KOTTAYAM - 686 560.
2 THE STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY ITS
SECRETARY, HIGHER EDUCATION DEPARTMENT,
SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695 001.
3 THE MAHATMA GANDHI UNIVERSITY,
REPRESENTED BY ITS REGISTRAR,
PRIYADARSHINI HILLS, KOTTAYAM - 686 560.
BY ADVS. K.JAJU BABU (SR.)
SHRI.SURIN GEORGE IPE, SC
SMT.M.U.VIJAYALAKSHMI, SC
SRI.ASOK M.CHERIAN, ADDL AG
SRI.S.KANNAN SR.GP
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
24.10.2022 ALONG WITH WP(C).33822/2022 AND CONNECTED CASES,
THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
WPC 33820/22 & con. cases 2
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN
MONDAY, THE 24TH DAY OF OCTOBER 2022 / 2ND KARTHIA, 1944
WP(C) NO. 33828 OF 2022
PETITIONER:
DR.V.P.MAHADEVAN PILLAI, AGED 63,
S/O. PAPPUKUTTY PILLAI, VICE CHANCELLOR,
UNIVERSITY OF KERALA, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM
695 034, RESIDING AT SIVAPRIYA,
ARCHANA NAGAR, PONGUMOODU, MEDICAL
COLLEGE P.O, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM 695011.
BY ADVS. SRI.P.RAVINDRAN (SR.)
M.A.ASIF
ATHUL SHAJI
RESPONDENTS:
1 THE CHANCELLOR, UNIVERSITY OF KERALA,
KERALA RAJ BHAVAN, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM 695 099.
2 THE UNIVERSITY OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY ITS
REGISTRAR, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM 695 034.
3 GOVERNMENT OF KERALA REP.BY PRINCIPAL
SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF HIGHER EDUCATION,
GOVT. SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM 695 001.
BY ADVS. K.JAJU BABU (SR.)
SMT.M.U.VIJAYALAKSHMI, SC,
SRI.ASOK M.CHERIAN, ADDL. AG
SRI S.KANNAN-SR GP
SRI.THOMAS ABRAHAM, SC
WPC 33820/22 & con. cases 3
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR
ADMISSION ON 24.10.2022 ALONG WITH WP(C).33820/2022 AND
CONNECTED CASES, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE
FOLLOWING:
WPC 33820/22 & con. cases 4
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN
MONDAY, THE 24TH DAY OF OCTOBER 2022 / 2ND KARTHIA, 1944
WP(C) NO. 33822 OF 2022
PETITIONER:
M.K.JAYARAJ, AGED 61 YEARS, S/O.KUNJUKUTTAN
EZHUTHACHAN, VICE CHANCELLOR, UNIVERSITY OF
CALICUT, RESIDING AT 'VAISHAKAM', JUDGE MUK,
THRIKKAKKARA,
COCHIN-21
BY ADV M.SASINDRAN
RESPONDENTS:
1 THE CHANCELLOR, UNIVERSITY OF CALICUT
KERALA RAJ BHAVAN, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 001
2 STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY SECRETARY TO
GOVERNMENT, DEPARTMENT OF HIGHER EDUCATION,
SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM- 695 001
3 UNIVERSITY OF CALICUT REP.BY ITS REGISTRAR,
THENJIPALAM, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT-673 635
BY ADVS. K.JAJU BABU (SR.)
SMT.M.U.VIJAYALAKSHMI, SC
SRI.P.C.SASIDHARAN, SC
SRI.ASOK M.CHERIAN, ADDL. AG
SRI.S.KANNAN SR.GP
WPC 33820/22 & con. cases 5
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR
ADMISSION ON 24.10.2022 ALONG WITH WP(C)NO.33820/2022 AND
CONNECTED CASES, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE
FOLLOWING:
WPC 33820/22 & con. cases 6
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN
MONDAY, THE 24TH DAY OF OCTOBER 2022 / 2ND KARTHIA, 1944
WP(C) NO. 33821 OF 2022
PETITIONER:
DR. K.N.MADHUSOODANAN, VICE CHANCELLOR,
COCHIN UNIVERSITY OF SCIENCE & TECHNOLOGY,
THRIKKAKARA, KOCHI 682022.
BY ADV P.C.SASIDHARAN
RESPONDENTS:
1 THE CHANCELLOR, COCHIN UNIVERSITY OF SCIENCE
& TECHNOLOGY, KERALA RAJ BHAVAN,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM 695 099.
2 STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY
TO GOVERNMENT, HIGHER EDUCATION DEPARTMENT,
SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM 695 001.
3 COCHIN UNIVERSITY OF SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY
THRIKKAKARA, KOCHI 682 022, REP.BY ITS
REGISTRAR.
BY ADVS.K.JAJU BABU (SR.)
SMT.M.U.VIJAYALAKSHMI, SC
SRI.S.P.ARAVINDAKSHAN PILLAY, SC
SRI.ASOK M.CHERIAN, ADDL. AG
SRI.S.KANNAN, SR.GP
WPC 33820/22 & con. cases 7
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR
ADMISSION ON 24.10.2022 ALONG WITH WP(C)NO.33820/2022 AND
CONNECTED CASES, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE
FOLLOWING:
WPC 33820/22 & con. cases 8
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN
MONDAY, THE 24TH DAY OF OCTOBER 2022 / 2ND KARTHIA, 1944
WP(C) NO. 33824 OF 2022
PETITIONER:
DR.V.ANIL KUMAR, VICE CHANCELLOR, THUNCHATH
EZHUTHACHAN MALAYALAM UNIVERSITY, VAKKAD P.O.,
TIRUR, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT- 676 502.
BY ADVS. SRI.N.RAGHURAJ
VIVEK MENON
RESPONDENTS:
1 THE CHANCELLOR, UNIVERSITY OF KERALA,
KERALA RAJ BHAVAN, RAJ BHAVAN ROAD,
VELLAYAMBALAM JUNCTION, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM
695 099
2 THE THUNCHATH EZHUTHACHAN MALAYALA UNIVERSITY
VAKKAD P.O, TIRUR, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT-676 502,
REPRESENTED BY ITS REGISTRAR.
3 THE STATE OF KERALA REP.BY THE PRINCIPAL
SECRETARY TO THE GOVERNMENT, HIGHER EDUCATION
DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM -695 001.
BY ADVS. SRI. K.JAJU BABU (SR.)
SMT.M.U.VIJAYALAKSHMI, SC
SRI.P.C.SASIDHARAN, SC
SRI.ASOK M.CHERIAN, ADDL. AG
SRI.S.KANNAN, SR. GP
WPC 33820/22 & con. cases 9
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR
ADMISSION ON 24.10.2022 ALONG WITH WP(C)NO.33820/2022 AND
CONNECTED CASES, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE
FOLLOWING:
WPC 33820/22 & con. cases 10
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN
MONDAY, THE 24TH DAY OF OCTOBER 2022 / 2ND KARTHIA, 1944
WP(C) NO. 33823 OF 2022
PETITIONER:
DR. M.V.NARAYANAN, VICE CHANCELLOR,
SREE SANKARACHARYA UNIVERSITY OF SANSKRIT,
KALADY, KALADY P.O., ERNAKULAM DISTRICT,
KERALA - 683 574
BY ADVS. SRI. M.P.SREEKRISHNAN
A.MUHAMMED MUSTHAFA
RESPONDENTS:
1 CHANCELLOR, SREE SANKARACHARYA UNIVERSITY OF
SANSKRIT, KALADY, KALADY P.O., ERNAKULAM
DISTRICT, KERALA - 683 574
2 THE STATE OF KERALA REP. BY ITS CHIEF
SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, GOVT.SECRETARIAT,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM- 695 001.
3 DEPARTMENT OF HIGHER EDUCATION, GOVERNMENT
OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY TO
GOVERNMENT, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT,
ANNEXE - 2, 4TH FLOOR,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695 001.
4 SREE SANKARACHARYA UNIVERSITY OF SANSKRIT,
KALADY REP. BY ITS REGISTRAR, KALADY P.O.,
ERNAKULAM DISTRICT, KERALA - 683 574
WPC 33820/22 & con. cases 11
BY ADVS. SRI. K.JAJU BABU (SR.)
SMT.M.U.VIJAYALAKSHMI, SC
SRI.DINESH MATHEW J.MURIKAN, SC
SRI.ASOK M.CHERIAN, ADDL. AG
SRI.S.KANNAN, SR.GP
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR
ADMISSION ON 24.10.2022 ALONG WITH WP(C)NO.33820/2022 AND
CONNECTED CASES, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE
FOLLOWING:
WPC 33820/22 & con. cases 12
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN
MONDAY, THE 24TH DAY OF OCTOBER 2022 / 2ND KARTHIA, 1944
WP(C) NO. 33826 OF 2022
PETITIONER:
DR. GOPINATH RAVINDRAN, S/O. LATE P. RAVINDRAN,
AGED 61 YEARS, RESIDING AT ALUKKAL TERRACE,
PAYYAMBALAM, KANNUR DISTRICT, 670 001.
(VICE CHANCELLOR, KANNUR UNIVERSITY,
THAVAKKARA,
KANNUR - 670 002).
BY ADVS.SRI.RANJITH THAMPAN (SR.)
V.M.KRISHNAKUMAR
RESPONDENTS:
1 CHANCELLOR, KANNUR UNIVERSITY,
RAJ BHAVAN, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM 695 001.
2 STATE OF KERALA, REP. SECRETARY,
DEPARTMENT OF HIGHER EDUCATION,
SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM 695 001.
3 KANNUR UNIVERSITY REPRESENTED BY REGISTRAR,
THAVAKKARA, KANNUR 670002.
BY ADVS.SRI.K.JAJU BABU (SR.)
SMT.M.U.VIJAYALAKSHMI, SC
SRI.ASOK M.CHERIAN, ADDL.AG
SRI.S.KANNAN, SR.GP
SRI.I.V.PRAMOD, SC
WPC 33820/22 & con. cases 13
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR
ADMISSION ON 24.10.2022 ALONG WITH WP(C)NO.33820/2022 AND
CONNECTED CASES, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE
FOLLOWING:
WPC 33820/22 & con. cases 14
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN
MONDAY, THE 24TH DAY OF OCTOBER 2022 / 2ND KARTHIA, 1944
WP(C) NO. 33825 OF 2022
PETITIONER:
DR K. RIJI JOHN, S/O. K.C. JOHN,
AGED 59 YEARS, VICE CHANCELLOR, THE KERALA
UNIVERSITY OF FISHERIES AND OCEAN STUDIES,
PANANGAD P.O., ERNAKULAM DISTRICT,
KOCHI - 682 506, RESIDING AT VC QUARTERS,
1ST FLOOR, GUEST HOUSE KUFOS, MADAVANA,
PANANGAD, KOCHI - 682 506
BY ADVS. SRI.SANTHEEP ANKARATH
K.P.SUDHEER
J.RAMKUMAR
P.K.SURESH KUMAR (SR.)
RESPONDENTS:
1 THE CHANCELLOR, THE KERALA UNIVERSITY OF
FISHERIES AND OCEAN STUDIES, KERALA RAJ
BHAVAN, KERALA GOVERNOR'S CAMP P.O.,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695 009
2 STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY PRINCIPAL
SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF FISHERIES,
GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695 001
3 THE KERALA UNIVERSITY OF FISHERIES AND OCEAN
STUDIES, PANANGAD P.O., ERNAKULAM DISTRICT
682 506,REPRESENTED BY ITS REGISTRAR.
WPC 33820/22 & con. cases 15
BY ADVS. SRI.K.JAJU BABU (SR.)
SMT.M.U.VIJAYALAKSHMI, SC
SRI.ASOK M.CHERIAN, ADDL.AG
SRI.S.KANNAN, SR.GP
SRI.N.SATHEESH, SC
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR
ADMISSION ON 24.10.2022, ALONG WITH WP(C)NO.33820/2022 AND
CONNECTED CASES, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE
FOLLOWING:
WPC 33820/22 & con. cases 16
JUDGMENT
[WP(C) Nos.33820/2022, 33821/2022, 33822/2022, 33823/2022,
33824/2022, 33825/2022, 33826/2022, 33828/2022]
In a rather unusual sight, the Vice Chancellors of eight
Universities in Kerala have approached this Court, through the afore
different writ petitions.
2. Since the petitioners in these matters have sought similar
reliefs, hypostised on comparable factual pleadings; and because the
impugned proceedings is the same in all of them, I have heard the afore
writ petitions together and proceed to dispose them of jointly.
3. At the core of the allegations of the petitioners is the
imputation that the Chancellor of the Universities - of which they are
the Vice Chancellors - issued an analogously worded communication
dated 23.10.2022 to each of them, informing that 'they are all ceased to
be the Vice Chancellor of respective University with effect from
21.10.2022' (sic); and thus asking them to 'submit your resignation by
11.30 a.m. on 24.10.2022' (sic).
4. The petitioners vehemently assert that the afore
communications are per se illegal, incompetent and beyond the
jurisdiction of the Chancellor to have issued them.
5. The petitioners singularly predicate that, subject to the
differences in the nuances of the factual factors presented and involved
in each of their cases, the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court
referred to by the Chancellor of the Universities, in the impugned
communications, have no bearing on their appointments or on the facts
involved in their individual scenario; but that even without giving them
an opportunity of explaining so, the afore declaration has been thrust
upon them; thus justifying their legitimate apprehension that they will
have to cease their office as Vice Chancellors forthwith.
6. I have heard Sri.P.Ravindran, learned Senior Counsel,
instructed by Sri.M.A.Asif, appearing for the petitioner in W.P.(C)No.
33828/2022; Sri.Renjith Thampan, learned Senior Counsel, instructed
by Sri.Krishnakumar, appearing for the petitioner in W.P.(C)No.
33826/2022; Sri.P.C.Sasidharan, learned counsel appearing for the
petitioners in W.P.(C)No.33821/2022; Sri.Elvin Peter.P.J., learned
counsel appearing for the petitioner in W.P.(C)No.33820/2022;
Sri.N.Raghuraj, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner in W.P.
(C)No.33824/2022; Sri.M.Sasindran, learned counsel appearing for the
petitioner in W.P.(C)No.33822/2022; Sri.M.P.Sreekrishnan, learned
counsel appearing for the petitioner in W.P.(C)No.33823/2022;
Sri.Santheep Ankarath, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner in
W.P.(C)No.33825/2022; Sri.Jaju Babu, learned Senior Counsel,
instructed by Smt.M.U.Vijayalakshmy, learned Standing Counsel for the
Chancellor of the Universities and Sri.Asok M.Cherian, learned
Additional Advocate General, instructed by Sri.S.Kannan, learned
Senior Government Pleader, appearing for the State of Kerala in all
these matters.
7. Sri.P.Ravindran and Sri.Ranjith Thampan, learned Senior
Counsel, made very assertive submissions with respect to the manner
in which the impugned communications have been issued by the
Chancellor of the Universities. Their argument was that, as long as the
respective parent Acts applicable to the Universities do not provide any
power to the Chancellor, to either declare the appointments of Vice
Chancellors to be illegal, or to cancel the same on any ground other
than what is enumerated in it, he could not have acted as has been
reflected in these cases. They also imputed that the action of the
Chancellor is in flagrant violation of the principles of fair play and
natural justice, since even the parent Acts provide the petitioners an
opportunity to explain - but without admitting that he has jurisdiction
to call for such; and hence that their removal is per se incompetent,
especially when imposed with less than 24 hours notice.
8. Sri.Elvin Peter, learned counsel appearing for the Vice
Chancellor of Mahatma Gandhi University - the petitioner in W.P.(C)No.
33820/2022, in addition, argued that the judgment of the Hon'ble
Supreme Court, referred to by the Chancellor of the Universities in the
impugned communications, namely Professor (Dr.) Sreejith P.S. v.
Dr.Rajasree M.S. & Ors. (Civil Appeal Nos.7634-7635 of 2022), would
not apply to the appointments of any of the petitioners in this batch,
because the Hon'ble Court had delivered the same in the backdrop of
the 2010 Regulations of the University Grants Commission (UGC), as
amended by its 2013 notification; while all the petitioners in these
cases were appointed under the 2018 Regulations of the UGC, which
are completely distinct. He then adopted the other submissions of the
learned Senior Counsel as afore.
9. Sri.P.C.Sasidharan, learned counsel appearing for the
petitioner in W.P.(C)No.33821/2022 - who is the Vice Chancellor of the
Cochin University of Science and Technology, submitted that even if the
appointment of a Vice Chancellor may be null or void, the Chancellor
cannot act suo motu or unilaterally and has to await someone to
challenge it before this Court, through the plea for issuance of a writ of
quo warranto; and that the judgment in Sreejith (supra) was delivered
in personam, hence incapable of being used as a standard to assess the
validity of the appointments of other Vice Chancellors in the State.
10. Sri.N.Raghuraj and Sri.M.Sasindran, learned counsel
appearing for the Vice Chancellors of Thunchath Ezhuthachan
Malayalam University and Calicut University respectively, took me
extensively through the parent Acts of the said Universities, to argue
that when the Chancellor is not vested with any power to remove the
Vice Chancellor, he could not only have issued the impugned
communications, but cannot initiate action against them in future.
11. As far as Sri.M.P.Sreekrishnan, the learned counsel
appearing for the petitioner in W.P.(C)No.33823/2022 - Vice
Chancellor of Sree Sankarachanrya University of Sanskrit, Kalady, is
concerned, he had an adscititious argument that, though the Act
applicable to the said University allows the Chancellor to act against
the Vice Chancellor, inter alia, on 'good and sufficient grounds', it will
still require an enquiry to be done through a committee as stipulated
therein. He then pointed out that, going by Exhibit P6 produced in the
said writ petition, the Search Committee had found his client to be
imminent and extra ordinary; and therefore, that his candidature was
proposed by it unanimously, in preference to other six candidates. He
also thus prayed that the impugned communication of the Chancellor
be set aside.
12. Sri.Santheep Ankarath, learned counsel appearing for the
petitioner in W.P.(C)No.33825/2022 - the Vice Chancellor of KUFOS,
attempted a deviation from the afore contentions, saying that, as far as
the Act of the said University is concerned, what is required is that
there should be a panel of not more than three candidates to be placed
before the Chancellor; and hence that said panel can also have a single
name. He then argued that the 'UGC Regulations' do not apply either to
his client or to the University; and that, in any case, the Chancellor
could not have acted in the manner as he has now done, because his
client's appointment is already under challenge in W.P.(C)No.
16475/2021, at the instance of another person, through the plea for
issuance of a writ of quo warranto. He contended that, therefore, the
Chancellor could not have issued the impugned communications.
13. Sri.Jaju Babu, learned Senior Counsel, instructed by
Smt.M.U.Vijayalakshmi, learned Standing Counsel for the Chancellor of
the Universities involved - who is the same Authority, ex officio in his
capacity as the Governor of the State - in response, argued that the
impugned communications were issued in good faith and with an
intent to notify and inform each of the Vice Chancellors that, going by
the various judgments of the Hon'ble Supreme Court, their
appointments are not only untenable but void ab initio. The learned
Senior Counsel, thereafter, asserted that, it is solely to save them of the
ignominy of facing such removal, that the Chancellor offered them the
option of an honourable exit, by tendering their resignations, so as to
pave way for initiation of fresh processes for the appointment of new
Vice Chancellors, in terms of the inviolable holdings of the Hon'ble
Supreme Court. He vehemently submitted that his client has acted
wholly bona fide, without any intent to cause consternation to any of
the Vice Chancellors; and that he had no other option, but to initiate
action because, as is perspicuous from the judgments of the Hon'ble
Supreme Court in State of West Bengal v. Anindya Sunder Das &
Ors. (Civil Appeal No.6706/2022) and Gambhirdan K Gadhvi v. State
of Gujarat and Others (2022 (2) KLT Online 1106), the Chancellor of
the Universities involved in those cases was even found fault with in
not having followed the specific declarations made therein. He
explained that, it is solely in such circumstances, his client was
constrained to act, particularly in view of Sreejith (supra), which
relates to a University in Kerala.
14. The learned Senior Counsel thereafter submitted that,
since none of the Vice Chancellors accepted the option of tendering
their resignations, the Chancellor intends to now initiate appropriate
action against them, in implicit obedience to the judgments of the
Hon'ble Supreme Court; for which purpose, they have already been
served with notices asking them to show cause by 03.11.2022. He
concluded his submissions saying that it is only after the explanation of
each of the petitioners in these cases is considered by the Chancellor in
its proper perspective, will he take any further action, as may be
warranted under the judgments of the Hon'ble Supreme Court and the
law which governs the field.
15. Sri.Asok M.Cherian, learned Additional Advocate
General, interestingly, submitted that the State do not and does not
intend to take sides with either the Chancellor or the Vice Chancellors
and that the Government will abide by the directions to be issued by
this Court.
16. The rival positions of all parties being thus recorded, I
must say that the submissions of Sri.Jaju Babu, learned Senior Counsel
for the Chancellor, clear the air to a large and substantial extent, as far
as the specific controversy projected in these cases.
17. I say as afore since, prima facie, this Court has
reservations regarding the impugned communications issued by the
Chancellor because: for the first, it asks the Vice Chancellors to tender
their resignations, and that too within the shortest period possible;
and, for the second, it declares that they have ceased to be the Vice
Chancellors with effect from 21.10.2022.
18. I do not require to expatiate, nor do I need to rely on any
precedents, to declare that no one can be legally forced to tender
resignation. Pertinently, Sri.Jaju Babu explains this, saying that the
Chancellor was only offering an advice, so as to save the Vice
Chancellors from the fate of being removed from office ab initio.
Obviously, this Court cannot grant imprimatur to any such advice, and
for that reason alone, the impugned communications will have to fail.
19. For the second, as I have already said above, the
Chancellor has declared that the Vice Chancellors involved in these
cases have ceased to be in office after 21.10.2022. Apart from the fact
that no such 'declaration' could have been made by the Chancellor
without following due procedure, I completely fail to gather and
fathom the purport of his afore statement because, hypothetically
speaking, if, as per the conclusions of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the
afore cited precedents, had any or all of the vitiating factors stated
therein become attached to the petitioners, or to any one of them, their
appointments are not illegal or untenable from 21.10.2022 alone, the
Hon'ble Court having specifically used the phrase 'void ab initio'.
20. That being said, since Sri.Jaju Babu, learned Senior
Counsel, now says that the Chancellor himself has issued fresh notices
to each of the petitioners - which is affirmed at the Bar by their
respective learned counsel - asking them to show cause why action
could not be taken against them, I am certain that the relevance of the
impugned communications is, by far, lost.
21. This is unmistakable because, once the Chancellor
apparently has offered the petitioners an opportunity to show cause
against certain action proposed by him, it ineluctably means that they
are still in service and certainly eligible to continue as Vice Chancellors,
until such time as their term of office expires, or until they are removed
as per law.
In summation, the afore writ petitions are allowed and the
impugned communications/orders of the Chancellor of the Universities
involved in these cases, are hereby set aside.
After I dictated this judgment, Sri.Ranjith Thampan, learned
Senior Counsel and certain other learned counsel for the petitioners,
requested this Court to record their clients' objections qua the show
cause notices stated to have been issued to them by the Chancellor. I
am afraid that it is not available to them to urge so in these writ
petitions because, the said notices are not under challenge.
Sd/-
Devan Ramachandran, Judge
tkv
APPENDIX OF WP(C) 33828/2022
PETITIONER EXHIBITS:
Exhibit P1 A TRUE COPY OF THE NOTIFICATION NO.GS6-
4125/2017 DATED 20.01.2018 ISSUED BY THE
IST RESPONDENT CONSTITUTING THE SEARCH
AND SELECTION COMMITTEE TO MAKE
RECOMMENDATIONS.
Exhibit P2 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER NO.GS6-4125/2017
DATED 24.10.2018 OF THE IST RESPONDENT
APPOINTING THE PETITIONER.
Exhibit P3 TRUE COPY OF THE NOTIFICATION
NO.AD.A1.2/ 46621/2018-4125/2017 DATED
25.10.2018 OF THE 2ND RESPONDENT.
Exhibit P4 TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER NO.GS6-1225/2022
DATED 23.10.2022 OF THE PRINCIPAL
SECRETARY TO THE IST RESPONDENT.
Exhibit P5 A TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT OF THE
HONOURABLE SUPREME COURT DATED
21.10.2022 IN CIVIL APPEAL NOS.7634-7635
OF 2022.
Exhibit P6 A TRUE COPY OF THE REPLY LETTER OF THE
PETITIONER DATED 24.10.2022.
APPENDIX OF WP(C) 33822/2022
PETITIONER EXHIBITS:
Exhibit P1 A TRUE COPY OF THE NOTIFICATION NO.GS3-
1120/2019(3) DATED 02.03.2020 ISSUED ON
BEHALF OF THE CHANCELLOR, CONSTITUTING
SELECTIOON COMMITTEE.
Exhibit P2 A TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER NO.GS3-
1120/2019(5) DATED 11.07.2020 ISSUED ON
BEHALF OF THE CHANCELLOR
Exhibit P3 A TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED
21.10.2022 IN CIVIL APPEAL 7634-
7635/2022 OF THE SUPREME COURT.
Exhibit P4 A TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER NO.GS6-1225/22
DATED 23.10.2022 ISSUED BY THE PRINCIPAL
SECRETARY TO THE GOVERNOR.
APPENDIX OF WP(C) 33821/2022
PETITIONER EXHIBITS:
Exhibit P1 TRUE COPY OF THE APPOINTMENT ORDER
NO.GS5-2320/2018 DATED 24/4/2019 ISSUED
BY THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY TO THE
GOVERNOR
Exhibit P2 TRUE COPY OF THE ADVISORY REQUEST
RECEIVED BY THE PETITIONER FROM THE 1ST
RESPONDENT DATED 23/10/2022.
Exhibit P3 TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT IN CIVIL
APPEAL NOS.7634-7635 OF 2022 DATED
21/10/2022.
APPENDIX OF WP(C) 33824/2022
PETITIONER EXHIBITS:
Exhibit P1 TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE NOTIFICATION
PUBLISHED IN WEBSITE OF THE THIRD
RESPONDENT.
Exhibit P2 TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE NOTIFICATION
BEARING NO.GS5.1934/2017 DATED
16.12.2017, ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT
Exhibit P3 TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE ORDER/NOTIFICATION
BEARING NO.GS5.1934/2017 DATED
27.02.2018 ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT
Exhibit P4 TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE
COMMUNICATION/ORDER BEARING NO.GS6-1225
DATED 23.10.2022 ISSUED BY THE PRINCIPAL
SECRETARY TO THE GOVERNOR.
APPENDIX OF WP(C) 33823/2022
PETITIONER EXHIBITS:
Exhibit P1 A TRUE COPY OF THE NOTIFICATION, DATED
02.09.2021 ISSUED BY THE GOVERNOR'S
SECRETARIAT KERALA RAJ BHAVAN
Exhibit P2 A TRUE COPY OF THE NOTIFICATION DATED
05.11.2021 ISSUED BY THE GOVERNOR'S
SECRETARIAT KERALA RAJ BHAVAN
Exhibit P3 A TRUE COPY OF THE NOTIFICATION, DATED
09.09.2021, ISSUED BY THE ADDITIONAL
CHIEF SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, HIGHER
EDUCATION DEPARTMENT
Exhibit P4 A TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION, DATED
01.10.2021 PREFERRED BY THE PETITIONER
Exhibit P5 A TRUE COPY OF THE NOTIFICATION, DATED
07.03.2022 OF APPOINTMENT OF THE
PETITIONER
Exhibit P6 A TRUE COPY OF THE COMMUNICATION, DATED
23.10.2022 ISSUED BY THE SECRETARY TO
GOVERNOR
Exhibit P7 A TRUE COPY OF THE MINUTES, DATED
06.12.2021 OF THE MEETING OF SEARCH-CUM-
SELECTION COMMITTEE
Exhibit P8 A TRUE COPY OF THE RELEVANT EXTRACT OF
CLAUSE 7.3.(ii) OF UGC REGULATIONS, 2018
Exhibit P9 A TRUE COPY OF THE COMMUNICATION, DATED
14.10.2022
APPENDIX OF WP(C) 33826/2022
PETITIONER EXHIBITS:
Exhibit P1 A COPY OF THE APPOINTMENT ORDER OF THE
PETITIONER AS VICE CHANCELLOR DATED
23.11.2021.
Exhibit P2 COPY OF THE JUDGMENT REPORTED IN 2022
SUPREME (KER) 105 (DR.PREMACHANDRAN
KEEZHOTH VS. THE CHANCELLOR, KANNUR
UNIVERSITY)
Exhibit P3 COPY OF THE SAID LETTER OF THE PRINCIPAL
SECRETARY TO THE GOVERNOR DATED
23.10.2022.
APPENDIX OF WP(C) 33825/2022
PETITIONER EXHIBITS:
EXHIBIT P1 A TRUE COPY OF APPOINTMENT ORDER NO.GS3-
1062/2020(3) DATED 23.1.2021 ISSUED BY
THE 1ST RESPONDENT
EXHIBIT P2 A TRUE COPY OF THE STATEMENT FILED BY
THE STANDING COUNSEL FOR THE 1ST
RESPONDENT ON BEHALF OF THE 1ST
RESPONDENT AND DATED 12.11.2021 IN WP(C)
NO.16457/2021 BEFORE THIS HON'BLE COURT
EXHIBIT P3 A TRUE COPY OF THE COMMON JUDGMENT DATED
21.10.2022 IN CIVIL APPEAL NOS.7634 -
7635 OF 2022 PASSED BY HONOURABLE
SUPREME COURT
EXHIBIT P4 TRUE COPY OF LETTER NO.GS6-1225/2022
DATED 23.10.2022 ISSUED BY THE 1ST
RESPONDENT AND RECEIVED BY THE
PETITIONER BY EMAIL
APPENDIX OF WP(C) 33820/2022
PETITIONER EXHIBITS
Exhibit P1 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER NO.GS5-2030/18
DATED 27.05.2019 ISSUED BY THE 1SRT
RESPONDENT APPOINTING THE PETITIONER AS
THE VICE CHANCELLOR
Exhibit P2 TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER NO.GS6-1225/2022
DATED 23.10.2022 ISSUED BY THE 1ST
RESPONDENT SIGNED BY THE SECRETARY TO
THE GOVERNOR TO VICE CHANCELLORS OF THE
NINE UNIVERSITIES IN THE STATE OF KERALA
INCLUDING THE PETITIONER.
