Tamil Nadu moves Supreme Court against Madras High Court's stay on Vice-Chancellor appointment laws
The Tamil Nadu government, in a late night move, approached the Supreme Court on Tuesday (June 3, 2025) against a Madras High Court stay of nine Acts related to the appointments of Vice-Chancellors in State-run universities.
The High Court had ordered a stay despite the Supreme Court, in an April 8, 2025 judgment, having invoked its inherent powers under Article 142 of the Constitution to deem that the Bills were assented to by the State Governor R.N. Ravi.
Tamil Nadu Governor case: Click here to read the full judgement of the Supreme Court
Following the verdict, the State government had notified the Acts.
However a petition was filed in the High Court challenging The Tamil Nadu University Amendment Act; The Tamil Nadu Veterinary and Animal Sciences University (Amendment) Act; The Tamil Nadu Universities Laws (Amendment) Act, 2022; The Tamil Nadu Dr. Ambedkar Law University (Amendment) Act, 2022; The Tamil Nadu Dr.M.G.R. Medical University, Chennai (Amendment) Act, 2022; The Tamil Nadu Agricultural University (Amendment) Act, 2022; The Tamil Nadu Fisheries University (Amendment) Act, 2023; The Tamil Nadu Veterinary and Animal Sciences University (Amendment) Act, 2023
The High Court's Vacation Bench stayed the amendments in an order on May 21, 2025 on the ground that UGC Regulations 2018 would prevail over the State legislation by virtue of the doctrine of repugnancy.
Challenging the stay, the State, represented by senior advocate P. Wilson, argued there is a strong presumption of constitutionality against laws passed by the legislature.
Editorial | Misplaced urgency: On the Madras High Court interim order
'Courts should be slow in passing interim orders in matters challenging constitutionality of provisions and against the strong presumption of constitutionality. The High Court passed an interim order directing stay of operation of provisions which take away power of appointment of Vice Chancellor from the hands of the Chancellor and vest the same in the government,' the petition said.
Pertinently, the State argued that the writ petition was filed in the High Court during vacations, without pleading any urgency in the matter.
'The Vacation Division Bench of the High Court entertained the writ petition from a lawyer belonging to a political party…. The Division Bench passed the order without granting reasonable opportunity to the State to defend its case by filing a counter affidavit. The matter was heard during vacations till 6.30 pm, beyond court hours, and the Impugned order was passed,' the State contended.
The State said its appeal has raised questions of law with wide ramifications pertaining to the issue of federalism and State autonomy to establish, regulate and administer State Universities under Entry 32 List II of the Seventh Schedule of the Constitution along with the issues pertaining to judicial impropriety and discipline in keeping a hands-off approach.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Time of India
31 minutes ago
- Time of India
'Ridiculous and false': Joe Biden refutes autopen misuse allegations as Trump orders probe into 'conspiracy'
Former US President Joe Biden defended himself on Wednesday amid allegations of autopen misuse, asserting his full control of White House operations during his presidency. The now-president Donald Trump initiated an inquiry into Biden's administration, claiming that senior officials employed autopen signatures to mask the former president's mental deterioration. Refuting the claims, Biden released a statement asserting, "I made the decisions about the pardons, executive orders, legislation, and proclamations. Any suggestion that I didn't is ridiculous and false." "This is nothing more than a distraction by Donald Trump and Congressional Republicans who are working to push disastrous legislation that would cut essential programs like Medicaid and raise costs on American families, all to pay for tax breaks for the ultra-wealthy and big corporations," he continued. This comes as Trump, on Wednesday, directed Attorney General Pam Bondi to investigate top Biden officials, suggesting they possibly collaborated to mislead the public about his cognitive state and exercised presidential authority via autopen. An autopen functions as a mechanical apparatus that produces genuine-looking signatures through the physical control of writing tools. These devices differ from traditional stamps and digital signature printing methods, as they work with diverse writing implements ranging from ballpoint pens to permanent markers, according to product details of commercially available autopens, as Fox News reported. Notably, The Justice Department has accepted the practice of using autopen for signing both legislation and pardons across various presidential administrations. The presidential pardon power, as explicitly outlined in the Constitution, is absolute, and Trump's assertions regarding Biden's knowledge of specific actions remain unsubstantiated without any supporting evidence. Also read: What is Autopen? Signature device used by Biden to sign pardons; Trump orders inquiry In a Wednesday memo, Trump emphasised that presidential signatures carry substantial authority and responsibility. These signatures transform proposals into laws, enable governmental appointments, establish or remove national policies, and grant prisoner releases. "In recent months, it has become increasingly apparent that former President Biden's aides abused the power of Presidential signatures through the use of an autopen to conceal Biden's cognitive decline and assert Article II authority," Trump wrote. "This conspiracy marks one of the most dangerous and concerning scandals in American history. The American public was purposefully shielded from discovering who wielded the executive power, all while Biden's signature was deployed across thousands of documents to effect radical policy shifts," he added. "Given clear indications that President Biden lacked the capacity to exercise his Presidential authority, if his advisors secretly used the mechanical signature pen to conceal this incapacity, while taking radical executive actions all in his name, that would constitute an unconstitutional wielding of the power of the Presidency, a circumstance that would have implications for the legality and validity of numerous executive actions undertaken in Biden's name," Trump further said. House Republicans, under Oversight Committee Chairman James Comer's leadership, commenced an investigation last month to assess whether Biden, experiencing declining health in his presidency's final months, was mentally capable of authorising autopen usage. Comer indicated last week he would consider requiring Biden to appear before the House for questioning if needed. Trump has made similar accusations in the past as well. In March, Trump argued that any preemptive pardons signed by President Biden using an autopen for House select committee members who conducted the January 6, 2021, Capitol attack investigation would be deemed "void" and "vacant."
Hans India
an hour ago
- Hans India
Why not FIR filed over stampede near Chinnaswamy Stadium, questions Karnataka BJP
Bengaluru: Slamming the Congress-led government in Karnataka for not filing an FIR regarding the stampede incident near the Chinnaswamy Stadium in Bengaluru which resulted in the deaths of at least 11 people, the Karnataka BJP on Thursday demanded a judicial probe into the incident by a sitting High Court judge. The demand was made in the joint press conference by the BJP State President and MLA B.Y. Vijayendra and the Leader of the Opposition R. Ashoka and Chalavadi Narayaswamy, the Leader of the Opposition in the Legislative Council. Vijayendra said: 'An unnatural death case (UDR) has been registered at the Cubbon Park police station, and an investigation has begun regarding the tragedy. Eleven innocent lives were lost due to the government's irresponsibility and thorough investigation is needed. The state government cannot escape accountability. Why the FIR has been not filed yet,' he questioned. Vijayendra urged the Chief Minister to order an inquiry by a sitting High Court judge and called for proper decisions from the state government. He further demanded a minimum compensation amount of Rs 50 lakh for the families of the victims. Criticising the magisterial probe order, Vijeyandra charged that an inquiry by a magistrate would be insufficient to investigate the Chief Minister and cabinet members, who are in a position of culpability. He questioned the Chief Minister's decision to order a magisterial inquiry, stating that the government is unwilling to take responsibility for its failures. He stated that a situation has arisen in the state where the Chief Minister, Deputy Chief Minister, and Home Minister should resign. Vijayendra also demanded that RCB owners should provide compensation. He highlighted that when an elephant from Karnataka caused a death by trampling in Kerala, the Karnataka government announced a compensation of Rs 25 lakh. Vijayendra further criticised the state government's "inhumane conduct" as "condemnable". He pointed out that even as news channels already reported five or six deaths, the Deputy Chief Minister was celebrating at Chinnaswamy Stadium, and ruling party members continued their selfie spree at Vidhana Soudha. Leader of Opposition R. Ashoka, meanwhile, said: 'We will not accept an investigation by the District Collector. A Public Interest Litigation (PIL) is being filed before the High Court Chief Justice. The investigation must be conducted under the supervision of a High Court judge, and an SIT should be formed for this purpose. The report must be submitted directly to the High Court. Justice must be delivered for all these deaths, and those responsible must be punished.' 'How can Deputy Commissioners, who work under the CM and report to him, conduct an impartial investigation? They were responsible for planning the event, finalizing its framework, and making preparations. It's impossible to believe they would honestly investigate the government's lapses and errors. Deceiving the public and causing deaths is bad enough—why are they now resorting to self-deception and adding to their sins? Only a judicial probe can deliver justice to innocent lives and their parents. The Congress government must not stoop to such pettiness even in the face of death." Leader of the Opposition in the Legislative Council, Chalavadi Narayanaswamy, questioned: "If the police and the government are not responsible, then who is?" Narayanaswamy, has asserted that the state government is directly responsible for the deaths. He demanded that the Chief Minister and Deputy Chief Minister take direct responsibility and resign immediately. He questioned why the state government felt the need to organise the celebration, which should have been handled by a cricket body. He condemned the government's announcement of only Rs 10 lakh compensation for those who died in such a tragic incident, calling it unacceptable. Meanwhile, social activist Snehamayi Krishna filed a complaint with the Cubbon Park police on Thursday against CM Siddaramaiah, Deputy CM D.K. Shivakumar, office-bearers of the KSCA, and others. In his complaint, Krishna demanded that the police register the case under Section 106 of the BNS Act. A copy of the complaint has also been sent to the bench of the Chief Justice of the Karnataka High Court, and the petition has pleaded for action to be initiated against the guilty, stating it is a serious matter.
Time of India
an hour ago
- Time of India
Same sex couples can constitute a family: Madras High Court
Though the Supreme Court may not have legalised marriage between same sex couples , they can very well form a family, the Madras High Court has held and allowed a young woman to join her female partner and said the two women can constitute a family. A division bench of Justices G R Swaminathan and V Lakshminarayanan said the expression "family" has to be understood in an expanded sense. Hearing a writ petition seeking to produce before court a 25-year old woman and set her at liberty, the bench said: "To a specific question from us, the detenue (the 25-year old woman) replied that she is a lesbian and in relationship with the writ petitioner." She made it clear to the court that she wanted to go with the petitioner. She confirmed the allegation that she is being detained against her will by her natal family. "It appeared that she was forcibly taken to her home and beaten. She told us that her natal family members forced her to undergo certain rituals so that she will become "normal". She even apprehended danger to her life." In the affidavit filed in support of the writ petition, the petitioner has nowhere described the true nature of her relationship with the detenue." Even in her complaint to the police, the petitioner called herself as the detenue's close friend. We can understand the hesitation on her part." Live Events Further, the court said: "While Supriyo @ Supriya Chakraborty Vs Union of India (Supreme Court) may not have legalised marriage between same sex couples, they can very well form a family. Marriage is not the sole mode to found a family." The concept of "chosen family" is now well settled and acknowledged in LGBTQIA+ jurisprudence, the court said adding the petitioner and the detenue can very well constitute a family. Justice Anand Venkatesh, Judge of Madras HC, in Prasanna J Vs S Sushma approved a "Deed of familial Association" that purported to recognise the civil union entered into between LGBTQAI+ partners. The Supreme Court, in NALSA and Navtej Johar case, declared that sexual orientation is a matter of individual choice and that it is one of the most basic aspects of self-determination, dignity and freedom. It is an integral part of personal autonomy and self-expression and falls within the realm of personal liberty guaranteed under Article 21 of the Constitution. The High Court, in its judgment dated May 22, 2025 said: "Since we have satisfied ourselves that the detenue wants to join the petitioner and that she is being detained against her will, we allow this Habeas Corpus petition and set her at liberty. We also restrain the detenue's natal family members from interfering with her personal liberty." Also, the court directed the police to provide protection to the detenue as well as the petitioner as and when required. Economic Times WhatsApp channel )
