Andhra Pradesh High Court Declares Vice Chancellor’s Reappointment Void Ab Initio Due to UGC Regulation Violations

Court Emphasizes Central Legislation’s Supremacy Over State Laws in Higher Education Appointments

The Andhra Pradesh High Court, in a significant ruling, has quashed the reappointment of Dr. Janakiram Tholeti as the Vice Chancellor of Dr. YSR Horticulture University. The bench, comprising Chief Justice Dhiraj Singh Thakur and Justice R. Raghunandan Rao, declared the reappointment void ab initio, citing non-compliance with University Grants Commission (UGC) regulations. The court emphasized the mandatory inclusion of a UGC Chairman’s nominee in the selection committee and reinforced the precedence of central legislation over state laws in educational appointments.

The case arose from the government’s reappointment of Dr. Janakiram Tholeti as Vice Chancellor without initiating a fresh selection process. Petitioners Munavathu Dharu Naik and Dr. G. Ravishankar Reddy challenged the reappointment on two grounds: the lack of a new selection process and the non-compliance with UGC regulations during the initial appointment. They argued that the Search Committee did not include a nominee of the UGC Chairman, as mandated by Regulation 7.3 of the UGC Regulations, 2018.

The court addressed the necessity of a fresh selection process for reappointment. Citing precedents, including Dr. Premachandran Keezhoth v. Chancellor, Kannur University and State of West Bengal v. Anindya Sundar Das, the bench concluded that reappointment without a new selection process is permissible unless explicitly required by the governing statutes. The court noted, “In the absence of any specific provision in the statutes, prescribing the need to subject the incumbent Vice Chancellor to a fresh process of selection, it would not be necessary for the Government to follow that procedure for purposes of reappointment.”

The High Court extensively discussed the conflict between state and central legislation regarding the composition of the Search Committee. It emphasized that the UGC regulations, being part of central legislation, take precedence over state laws due to the principle of repugnancy under Article 254 of the Constitution. The bench highlighted the mandatory nature of UGC regulations, stating, “The recommendations made by a Search Committee, constituted contrary to the UGC regulations, would be void ab initio.”

The judgment underscored the importance of adhering to central regulations in educational appointments. It referred to the Supreme Court’s rulings in Gambhirdan K. Gadhvi v. State of Gujarat and Professor (Dr.) Sreejith P.S. v. Dr. Rajasree M.S., which affirmed the binding nature of UGC regulations. The court stated, “Any appointment as a Vice Chancellor made on the recommendation of a Search Committee, which is constituted contrary to the provisions of the UGC Regulations, shall be void ab initio.”

Chief Justice Thakur remarked, “The UGC regulations are mandatory and any deviation in the selection process renders the appointment void. The principle of central legislation’s supremacy ensures uniform standards in higher education across states.”

The Andhra Pradesh High Court’s decision to quash Dr. Janakiram Tholeti’s reappointment underscores the judiciary’s commitment to uphold the rule of law in educational appointments. By reinforcing the mandatory nature of UGC regulations and the supremacy of central legislation, this ruling sets a significant precedent for future appointments in state universities. The judgment is expected to ensure stricter compliance with UGC norms, thereby promoting transparency and fairness in the selection of academic leaders.

Date of Decision:June 24, 2024