TN govt appoints V-C search panels for Dr Ambedkar Law University
CHENNAI/THANJAVUR : Three weeks after the landmark verdict of the Supreme Court granting 'deemed assent' to 10 bills that transferred powers to appoint V-Cs in many of the state-run universities from the governor to the government, the Tamil Nadu government has formed search panels for the appointment of V-Cs in Tamil University and The Tamil Nadu Dr Ambedkar Law University.
A three-member search panel — comprising Aruna Jagadeesan, retired judge of the Madras High Court, as the government's nominee, S Sachidhanandham, former V-C of the law university and former professor of National Law University (New Delhi), as the syndicate's nominee, and V Vijayakumar, former V-C of the law university, as the senate's nominee — has been constituted for selecting a new V-C for TN Dr Ambedkar Law University.
The search panel for Tamil University consists of five members. Justice KBK Vasuki, former Judge of the Madras High Court, and K Deenabandu, former Chief Secretary of TN, will be the government's nominees. M Selvam, retired professor of Bharathidasan University, and M Thangaraju, former V-C of Periyar University, will be the syndicate's nominees, and S Rajendran, professor and head of economics department of the Gandhigram Rural Institute, will be the senate's nominee.
Notably, the respective Acts governing these universities did not have a governor-chancellor's nominee in the search panel, unlike many other state universities. While the chancellor's nominees have been removed in some of these through 10 amendment bills cleared by the apex court, a few other universities still have the nominees.
It is to be noted that the 10 bills transferred the powers of appointing V-Cs in 18 state universities. Higher education department officials said search panels for all other state universities will be notified soon.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Hindu
4 hours ago
- The Hindu
Murugan devotee conference pre-event: Tamil Nadu government apprehends law and order issues
The Tamil Nadu government on Monday opposed the Hindu Munnani's plea for extended pre-event celebrations ahead of the Murugan devotee conference in Madurai and informed the Madurai Bench of the Madras High Court that it apprehended law and order issues and 'a situation like the recent stampede in Bengaluru'. Hence, it was willing to grant permission for only three days to the outfit for installing temporary miniatures of the six abodes of Lord Murugan at the 'Muruga Bakthargalin Aanmeega Maanadu'. The Hindu Munnani, represented by State secretary S. Muthukumar, had filed a petition before the High Court seeking a direction to the police to grant permission for installing miniatures of the six abodes of Lord Murugan at Amma Thidal near the Vandiyur toll gate and conducting pujas. The petitioner said the Hindu Munnani had decided to arrange a gathering of devotees of Lord Murugan on June 22. The miniatures of 'Arupadai Veedugal' were planned to be installed at the venue from June 10 to June 22. Pujas would be performed and prasadam would be distributed to the devotees, he said, adding that the Sthalapuranam of the six abodes would be displayed and devotees would chant Kanda Shashti Kavacham and Thiruppugazh. Spiritual and cultural programmes would be held at the venue, which is a private land, and the land owner had given his consent, he said. A representation was made to the Madurai City Police for permission to use sound amplifiers at the event. A representation was also made for arranging darshan of the miniatures from June 10 to June 22. The police rejected permission for using microphone sets and installing miniatures and temporary models, the petitioner said. He alleged that a police team went to the place where the miniatures were being made and threatened workers and volunteers not to proceed with the work. He sought a direction to the police to grant permission for installing the miniatures of the six abodes of Lord Murugan at the venue and conducting the pujas. The government told the court that the Hindu Munnani had not responded to all the questions put forth by the police. The organisation, however, submitted that it had done so. Justice B. Pugalendhi directed the Hindu Munnani to furnish its response to the questions and the police to take a decision by June 12. The court permitted the petitioner to proceed with making the miniatures. However, no puja shall be conducted for now, the court said. It posted the matter for hearing on June 13.
&w=3840&q=100)
Business Standard
9 hours ago
- Business Standard
AAI seeks new handler at Chennai airport amid ongoing Çelebi's legal battle
The Airports Authority of India (AAI) informed the Madras High Court on Monday that it must appoint a new ground handling and cargo operator for Chennai International Airport, following the termination of Turkish firm Çelebi Airport Services India's contract over national security concerns. Appearing before Justice Abdul Quddhose, Solicitor General of India Tushar Mehta said the airport requires a minimum of three ground handlers to maintain uninterrupted operations. With Çelebi's removal, the AAI is compelled to initiate a fresh tendering process to fill the operational gap, according to a report by Bar and Bench. However, the AAI clarified that any new appointment would be provisional and subject to the outcome of ongoing legal proceedings initiated by Çelebi in both the Madras and Delhi High Courts. The Turkish company is contesting the cancellation of its contracts at various Indian airports, as well as the underlying reason — the withdrawal of its security clearance by India's Bureau of Civil Aviation Security (BCAS). Çelebi contract terminated over security concerns The BCAS revoked Çelebi's clearance following geopolitical tensions, after Turkey expressed support for Pakistan during a recent four-day conflict with India. Çelebi has challenged this decision in multiple courts, including those in Bombay and Gujarat. HC allows AAI to proceed with new appointment The Madras High Court allowed the AAI to proceed with appointing a new ground handler, but only on a provisional basis, subject to the outcome of ongoing legal proceedings. The court permitted Çelebi to request an official inventory of its assets from the AAI. The court also ruled that either party could return to court if any of the undertakings, such as not using Çelebi's equipment or software, were violated. In addition to the ongoing proceedings in Chennai, Çelebi has filed a writ petition specifically challenging the revocation of its security clearance. The matter is listed for hearing on June 24. A parallel case related to the company's role at Delhi International Airport is under consideration by the Delhi High Court, where judgment has been reserved. The Madras High Court will resume hearing the original application concerning the Chennai airport contract on July 7.
The Hindu
11 hours ago
- The Hindu
Madras High Court advices Chennai Commissioner of Police not to send investigating officers on bandobust duty
The Madras High Court, on Monday (June 9, 2025) advised Greater Chennai City Commissioner of Police (CoP) A. Arun to ensure officers investigating criminal cases do not get diverted for any other work such as providing bandobust (security) for public events/VIPs so that the investigating officers (IOs) could devote their time and conclude the investigations as early as possible. Justice P. Velmurugan said, he would summon Director General of Police/Head of Police Force Shankar Jiwal too in an appropriate case and give a similar advice so that it could be followed by police officers across Tamil Nadu. The judge said, it was high time the judiciary and the police department worked in tandem to reduce the pendency of criminal cases. The judge also told State Public Prosecutor Hasan Mohamed Jinnah there were discrepancies between the data maintained by the police department and the judiciary with respect to disposal of criminal cases. He said, most of the times, the police close criminal cases by terming them as 'mistake of fact' but that does not get reflected in the judicial records. He added in some cases, the police complete investigation and file final reports but that information does not find place in judicial records because the courts do not take those reports on file. Mr. Arun told the court the discrepancies could be sorted out if the Principal District Judges and Superintendents of Police conduct monthly meetings to crosscheck the data. Concurring with him, Justice Velmurugan said, such practice of conducting monthly meetings do not appear to be followed in many districts. After asking Mr. Arun to set things right at his end in coordination with the trial courts, the judge told the Commissioner that any non-cooperation on the part of the judicial officers could be brought to his notice so that he could issue appropriate directions. 'The poor and illiterate people do not know the legal procedures beyond the process of lodging police complaints. Therefore, it is essential that the criminal justice system works for their benefit and it does not take years together even for a simple criminal case to reach its logical conclusion. Let us do something to make sure that justice is delivered at the earliest,' the judge told the CoP. He asked the officer to submit fresh data by July 8 regarding the pending criminal cases within Chennai city limits along with statistics related to those under investigation, the cases in which final reports had been filed, the cases that were pending trial and so on. The direction was issued after the Commissioner was summoned to the court in connection with non registration of a SC/ST case. Mr. Jinnah told the court that though the writ petitioner V. Vanamalai had produced a copy of a communication sent by the National Commission for Scheduled Castes calling for an action taken report from the CoP on the petitioner's complaint, the Commissionerate had not received any such communication. Though the NCSC had claimed to have sent it by e-mail, no such e-mail had been received, he said. After hearing the SPP, the judge asked him to make the submissions by way of a counter affidavit by June 23 so that appropriate orders could be passed on the writ petition.
