Supreme Court To Form Search Committee For Appointment Of Regular Vice-Chancellors In Kerala Universities Amid Governor–State Deadlock
The Bench urged both sides to avoid further escalation over the issue of temporary appointments, observing that its focus was to ensure that regular VCs were appointed without delay.
The Supreme Court today, while hearing the Kerala Governor’s petition challenging the Kerala High Court’s decision upholding the State’s interpretation of the law on temporary Vice-Chancellor appointments, said it would itself constitute a Search Committee to facilitate the appointment of regular Vice-Chancellors for APJ Abdul Kalam Technological University and Kerala University of Digital Sciences, Innovation and Technology, after the State of Kerala and the Governor, in his capacity as Chancellor, failed to reach a consensus on the process.
A Bench of Justice J.B. Pardiwala and Justice R. Mahadevan was hearing the matter.
Appearing for the Chancellor, Attorney General R. Venkatramani, appearing along with Senior Advocate P. Sreekumar, reiterated that the Governor had acted “in terms of the judgment,” while Senior Advocate Jaideep Gupta, for the State, said, “We tried, but it seems we have gone the wrong way.”
When Gupta referred to the Court’s July 30 order noting the regular VC process may take time, Justice Pardiwala asked, “Why is it taking time?” Gupta explained that under Sections 13(1) and (2) of the APJ Abdul Kalam Technological University Act, the Committee’s constitution was contentious, submitting, “We started the process on 12 July, 2024, but we were met with a different committee constituted by the Chancellor himself.”
Justice Pardiwala queried how the authority to constitute the committee was determined. Gupta maintained it lay with the State under the UGC Regulations, but the Chancellor ignored its suggestions. The AG objected, “Don’t say that... The Chancellor went by UGC Regulation.” When asked who had the authority, the AG replied, “As per UGC, the Chancellor.”
The Bench proposed that both sides to give four names each, with one nomination from the UGC, and the Court to constitute the Search Committee. “The Chancellor and State Government should sit for a cup of coffee,” Justice Pardiwala remarked. The AG informed the Court of prior meetings with the Chancellor but cited governance issues at the universities, including five years without auditing.
On the issue of temporary VCs, Gupta said the State had challenged the Governor’s fresh notifications, arguing under Section 13(7) the Chancellor could only appoint from a panel recommended by the State. Justice Pardiwala asked if the State intended to challenge the incumbent’s fitness; Gupta replied that the objection was procedural, not personal.
The Court directed both sides to submit names for the Search Committee by tomorrow morning. “In the larger interest, we may ignore what was pointed out by Mr. Gupta. We will constitute a Search Committee and it will give its opinion. You, in consultation with the State, sit and decide one with both universities,” Justice Pardiwala said, cautioning, “Mr Gupta, our respect to your client, don’t precipitate on temporary VC issue. That does not mean the position of law changes.”
The matter will be listed tomorrow at the top of the Board for further directions.
Background
The petition filed by the Kerala Governor challenges the Kerala High Court's judgment dated July 14, 2025, which upheld the State’s reliance on Section 13(7) of the APJ Abdul Kalam Technological University Act, 2015, to make temporary appointments despite the six-month statutory cap and alleged non-compliance with University Grants Commission (UGC) Regulations.
The petition asserts that the Governor, as Chancellor, cannot be compelled by the State Government to appoint Vice Chancellors in violation of binding UGC norms. It argues that the appointments made under Section 13(7) are only permissible for six months and that the High Court erred in permitting continued tenure under the “until further orders” phrasing.
It states, “The UGC Regulations do not provide for a concept of temporary Vice Chancellors… The person to be appointed should be of quality and standard as provided in the UGC Regulations.”
The petition also asserts that none of the State Government’s recommended candidates met the academic eligibility criteria under the 2018 UGC Regulations, and that Section 13(7) cannot be invoked repeatedly to bypass central standards.
Cause Title: The Chancellor, APJ Abdul Kalam Technological University v. State of Kerala & Ors. (Diary No. 40761/2025)