SC quashes reappointment of Kannur University Vice-Chancellor, finds decision unwarranted intervention of Kerala govt

The Supreme Court on Thursday quashed the notification relating to the reappointment of Kannur University Vice-Chancellor and found that the appointment was an unwarranted intervention of the state government.
A bench of Chief Justice of India DY Chandrachud and also comprising Justice JB Pardiwala and Manoj Misra set aside the Kerala High Court order and quashed the notification re-appointing Gopinath Ravindran as the Vice-Chancellor of Kannur University.
“We have reached to the conclusion that although the notification reappointing the respondent No. 4 (Gopinath Ravindran) to the post of Vice-Chancellor was issued by
the Chancellor yet the decision stood vitiated by the influence of extraneous considerations or to put it in other words by the unwarranted intervention of the State Government,” the court said.
The “suitability” of a candidate for appointment to a post is to be judged by the appointing authority and not by the court unless the appointment is contrary to the statutory rules/provisions, the court said.
The court said it is the Chancellor who has been conferred with the competence under the Act 1996 to appoint or reappoint a Vice-Chancellor. No other person even the Pro-Chancellor or any superior authority can interfere with the functioning of the
statutory authority and if any decision is taken by a statutory authority at the behest or on a suggestion of a person who has no statutory role to play, the same would be patently illegal, the court said.
“Thus, it is the decision-making process, which vitiated the entire process of reappointment of the respondent No. 4 as the Vice-Chancellor. The case on hand is not one of mere irregularity. We emphasise on the decision-making process because in such a case the exercise of power is amenable to judicial review,” the court said.
With these observations, the top court set aside the impugned judgment and order passed by the High Court dated February 23, 2022 and quashed the Notification dated November 23, 2021 reappointing the Vice-Chancellor of the Kannur University.
The top court also noted that the facts make it abundantly clear that there was no independent application of mind, satisfaction or judgement on the part of the Chancellor and the respondent came to be reappointed only at the behest of the State Government.
Under the scheme of the Act 1996 and the statutes, the Chancellor plays a very important role, the court said and added further that he is not merely a titular head. In the selection of the Vice-Chancellor, he is the sole judge and his opinion is final in all respects.
In reappointing the Vice-Chancellor, the main consideration to prevail upon the Chancellor is the interest of the university.
“The Chancellor was required to discharge his statutory duties in accordance with law and guided by the dictates of his own judgment and not at the behest of anybody else. Law does not recognise any such extra constitutional interference in the exercise of statutory discretion. Any such interference amounts to dictation from political superior and has been condemned by courts on more than one occasions,” the court said.
The Court was hearing a petition filed by Premachandran Keezhoth and others. The petitioner has filed Special Leave Petition questioning as to whether there is any distinction in law in the matter of ‘appointment’ and/or re-appointment to a public office in respect of procedure/ eligibility of selection, where a procedure / eligibility for appointment’ has been set out in the University law and the applicable UGC Regulations