Vice chancellor selection in KTU, DUK tough call for Kerala government
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM: Uncertainty prevails over the appointment of new vice chancellors in APJ Abdul Kalam Technological University (KTU) and Digital University of Kerala (DUK) as the term of the incumbent interim VCs in both universities is set to end this month.
Though rules stipulate appointment of a regular V-C within six months of appointing an interim V-C, the process has been stalled indefinitely in all varsities due to differences between the government and governor on the composition of the selection panel. This would necessitate a return to the interim V-C arrangement.
In November last year, former governor Arif Mohammed Khan had appointed interim V-Cs in KTU and DUK for a six-month period following the failure to reach a consensus with the government on V-C selection. Khan made the appointments after disregarding a panel of names provided by the state government. His decision was challenged by the government in the High Court.
On Monday, the High Court made it clear that the V-C appointment must commence with the state government's recommendation. Though the verdict has come as a shot in the arm for the government, it is in a fix as finding a suitable person as interim V-C, as per the Acts of both varsities, seems a tough task.
As per the KTU Act, the charge of vice chancellor can be given either to the vice chancellor of any other university, the university's pro vice chancellor or the higher education secretary.
Notably, KTU does not have a pro vice chancellor at present. In the case of DUK, the charge can be given to either the vice chancellor of any other university or secretary of electronics and information technology department.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Time of India
an hour ago
- Time of India
'Aap hi ko copy kiya': Khan Sir's wedding banter with Tejashwi Yadav goes viral
Khan Sir with Tejashwi Yadav NEW DELHI: Popular educator Khan Sir, who tied the knot amid the recent India-Pakistan hostilities, held a grand reception in Patna on Monday. The event, which saw his wife AS Khan make her first public appearance, was attended by the who's who of Bihar politics, including governor Arif Mohammad Khan, deputy chief minister Samrat Chaudhary, leader of opposition Tejashwi Yadav, and others. Also Read: Who is Khan Sir's wife? India's favourite YouTube educator shares wedding news with students in a viral video One of the videos from the event showed a brief interaction between Yadav and Khan sir. The RJD leader, who recently became father for a second time, began the conversation by asking the educator when the marriage took place: " Kya hua, byah kab hua? " " Abhi jo India-Pakistan conflict chal raha tha, usi beech (during the recent India-Pakistan conflict)," the latter replied. — AlokChikku (@AlokChikku) Further, Khan sir said he "copied" Yadav by getting married suddenly and secretly. " Model aap hi ka tha se karke baad main batana hai. 12-13 log the sir. Jaise aap kiye na, vaise hi. Hum ne socha kahan se copy karenge, aapka hi copy kar liya sir (I followed your model sir. Got married secretly and revealed later. Only 12-13 people attended the wedding. I was thinking about whom to copy, so I copied you," he stated. Earlier, Khan sir, who runs a coaching institute for competitive exam aspirants, informed his students about his marriage. by Taboola by Taboola Sponsored Links Sponsored Links Promoted Links Promoted Links You May Like Promoções imperdíveis de voos baratos Voos | Anúncios de Pesquisa Saiba Mais Undo He told them during a live training session that they were the first recipients of the news as "my existence is because of you." He also explained to them why the wedding was a secret and private affair. " Meri shaadi ki tareekh tay ho gayi thi. isi dauraan Pakistan aur Bharat ke beech yudh shuru ho gaya, jis karan saade tareeke se shaadi ki gayi (My wedding date had already been decided, but around the same time, tensions between India and Pakistan intensified. So, we decided to keep it simple)," Khan Sir said. In a gesture of appreciation towards his students, he will hold a special feast exclusively for them on Friday.
Hindustan Times
2 hours ago
- Hindustan Times
Man who accused Sharmishta Panoli goes ‘missing' after multiple cases against him: Report
Wajahat Khan, the man whose police complaint led to the arrest of social media influencer and law student Sharmishta Panoli in Gurugram, has allegedly gone missing, India Today reported. Panoli, 22, was arrested by Kolkata Police on May 30 from Haryana's Gurugram based on a complaint filed by Wajahat Khan at the Garden Reach police station. She was accused of spreading communal hatred through a now-deleted video in which she used abusive language and criticised Bollywood celebrities for remaining silent on Operation Sindoor. Following her arrest, Panoli was produced before a Kolkata court and remanded in judicial custody till June 13. The incident triggered a political controversy, with the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) criticising the arrest, noting that Panoli had already deleted the video and apologised. Reports of Khan's disappearance have surfaced after multiple complaints were lodged against him in various locations, including Kolkata. Kolkata Police has received a formal complaint against 30-year-old Wazahat Khan Qadri Rashidi, a resident of the city. According to India Today, the complaint was filed by the Shree Ram Swabhiman Parishad, alleging that Khan posted derogatory and inflammatory remarks against the Hindu community on social media. The complaint, addressed to the Officer-in-Charge of the Garden Reach Police Station and dated June 2, requests the registration of an FIR under sections 196(1)(a), 299, 352, and 353(1)(c) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, along with sections 66A and 67 of the IT Act. It accuses Khan of using terms such as 'rapist cultures' and 'urine drinkers' to refer to Hindus. The complaint also claims that Khan employed sexually explicit and vulgar language while insulting Hindu deities, traditions, temples, and festivals. According to the letter, Khan's remarks are aimed at provoking communal discord, disturbing public order, and promoting hostility among religious communities. It calls for swift police action to avoid any escalation of tensions. Separately, an advocate lodged a complaint with the Delhi Police and Cyber Crime Unit, accusing Khan of hate speech, religious defamation, and offensive content under relevant provisions of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita and IT Act. Meanwhile, Assam chief minister Himanta Biswa Sarma said on Monday that a case has been filed in the state against a man from West Bengal for allegedly insulting several Hindu deities, including Goddess Kamakhya. The Assam government has approached West Bengal for his custody, and Sarma noted, "time alone will tell how they react to the request and cooperate with us." Wajahat Khan's father said that the complainant has not been seen since Sunday night, and the family has been receiving threatening phone calls ever since Sharmistha Panoli's arrest. 'My son is innocent and secular. He cannot insult Hinduism. We have been receiving threats since Sharmistha's arrest,' Saadat Khan said during an interview with Aaj Tak, a sister channel of India Today. When asked about the complaint accusing his son of insulting Hinduism, Saadat Khan suggested that Wajahat's social media account might have been hacked. He added that Wajahat had been extremely disturbed by the barrage of abusive and threatening phone calls in recent days, with people accusing him of having ruined Panoli's life. Saadat Khan said he, too, was targeted with similar threatening calls and verbal abuse.
Indian Express
5 hours ago
- Indian Express
Homes bulldozed at Delhi's Bhoomiheen Camp — minutes before HC heard petitions to stay demolition
Minutes before pleas to stay the demolition at Bhoomiheen Camp, in Southeast Delhi's Govindpuri, were heard by a vacation bench in the High Court on Monday, civic authorities had already started razing hutments. The two petitioners in the case lost their homes. When the petition was taken up, Justices Tushar Rao Gedela and Harish Vaidyanathan Shankar refused to halt the Delhi Development Authority's (DDA) action while issuing notices to the authorities. The two-judge bench's refusal on Monday came days after the HC dismissed a clutch of petitions by slum dwellers against the impending eviction and demolition. Justice Dharmesh Sharma, on May 26 and May 30, had rejected the pleas. The nearly three-decades-old slum cluster was home to migrants from UP, Bihar and West Bengal, among others, the single-judge bench was told during the hearings. The inhabitants included women who worked as domestic help, labourers in factories and local shops, and others who had meagre sources of income. The petitioners had moved the court first in 2023, claiming that the DDA, in 'an arbitrary and illegal manner, proposed to demolish their jhuggi-jhopdis'. The proposal, they contended, was contrary to the Delhi Slum & JJ Rehabilitation and Relocation Policy, 2015. It was contended that the surveys for their rehabilitation were conducted contrary to the policy, 'by an obscure, outsourced agency appointed by DDA'. It was also pointed out that due processes were not followed. Justice Sharma, in the May 26 ruling against 44 dwellers who moved court, and the verdict for which was reserved last year on December 6, 2024, held that the DDA has 'substantially adhered to all prescribed procedures in surveying the JJ clusters in question'. Refusing to set aside the survey, Justice Sharma emphasised that the petitioners have 'no vested right' to rehabilitation and that the earlier court-ordered interim stay on demolition 'has not only hindered the timely execution of the rehabilitation project but also resulted in a significant escalation of public expenditure.' The court also recorded that as per the DDA, 'over Rs 835.88 crore has been expended in the process of in-situ rehabilitation of JJ dwellers of Bhoomiheen Camp,' adding that 'it cannot be overlooked that the rehabilitation process is time-sensitive, and any further extension of timelines would result in additional expenditure of valuable public funds and delay the rehabilitation of other clusters and JJ dwellers.' Appeals by two petitioners from the earlier round of litigation — Manjoor Ali and Kashmir Lal — challenging Justice Sharma's order of May 26 and May 30, respectively, were before the vacation bench on Monday. Moments before their petition was taken up, their houses were razed. The demolition action, pending the appeal, was highlighted before the division bench. It, however, refused to stay the demolition action, orally remarking that it is being undertaken in compliance with the single judge's order. DDA also told the court that the dwellings of the petitioners were demolished. The court has kept the matter next for consideration on July 7, when the rehabilitation issue is likely to be taken up.
