3 days ago
- General
- New Indian Express
Tamil Nadu govt files petition in SC against Madras High Court order on Vice Chancellor appointments
NEW DELHI: The Tamil Nadu government has filed a Special Leave Petition (SLP) in the Supreme Court's vacation bench challenging the Madras High Court's May 21, 2025 order that stayed the operation of nine laws passed in 2020 related to the appointment of Vice Chancellors in state universities.
The case has gained importance as the parties involved in the disputes did not approach the vacation bench for relief, but after the Tamil Nadu government moved the Supreme Court, there are chances the matter will be heard in a day or two. The Supreme Court is currently on summer vacation until July 13, with only limited hearings taking place, and the regular court will reopen on July 14.
According to Supreme Court registry sources, the case will be heard soon. 'The matter is very sensitive in nature. So it will come up for hearing in a day or two,' a registry official told TNIE.
The petition before the High Court challenged the state laws on how Vice Chancellors of state universities are appointed, saying they violate the University Grants Commission (UGC) Regulations of 2018.
In the SLP, prepared by senior advocate P Wilson, the Tamil Nadu government referred to a 2014 judgment, saying courts should be cautious in passing interim orders in constitutional matters and must respect the strong presumption of constitutionality.
It is important to note that these laws were earlier declared valid by the Supreme Court using its special powers under Article 142 of the Constitution after it ruled that the Governor's decision to send the bills for the President's approval was illegal.
The Tamil Nadu government said the High Court's interim order stayed the provisions that shift the power to appoint Vice Chancellors from the Chancellor (the Governor) to the state government. The government added that the order effectively gave final relief at the interim stage.
The state government also pointed out that the petition was filed during court vacations without showing any urgency. The High Court's vacation bench heard the petition from a lawyer linked to a political party, which the Tamil Nadu government said went against the High Court's April 29, 2025, notification that only 'very urgent matters' should be listed during vacations.
'The division bench of the High Court did not give sufficient opportunity to the petitioner—State to file a counter affidavit or respond to the writ petition or even argue before staying nine statutes enacted by the State Legislature which received deemed assent from this court in a landmark judgement titled State of Tamil Nadu Vs Governor of Tamil Nadu,' the government said.
The state also accused the High Court of showing 'undue haste' in hearing the interim applications and said the court gave 'extraneous reasons for its findings.'
While it is not unusual for vacation courts to sit beyond normal hours for urgent cases, the Tamil Nadu government said there was no reason for the High Court bench to rush the hearing on May 21 without giving the state a proper chance to respond, especially when no action under the laws was expected before June.
It also noted a strange incident during the May 21 hearing, when the court's microphone was muted and neither those inside the courtroom nor those attending virtually could hear the order being passed.
'The High Court has given extraneous reasons for its findings such that the Senior Counsel representing the Petitioner was part of the counsel who argued the batch of writ petitions challenging the farm laws,' the Tamil Nadu government said.
