The PIL was filed by advocate K. Venkatachalapathy. He argued that the 12 amendments passed by the Tamil Nadu government were unconstitutional. According to him, the changes clashed with the University Grants Commission (UGC) Regulations — which are central laws.
Madras: The Madras High Court has temporarily stayed the Tamil Nadu government’s new laws that tried to take away the Governor’s role in appointing Vice-Chancellors (VCs) of state-run universities. These laws were passed by the Tamil Nadu Assembly in April 2025. The High Court passed this stay order on Wednesday while hearing a Public Interest Litigation (PIL).
A special vacation bench of Justices G.R. Swaminathan and V. Lakshminarayan heard the case. The hearing witnessed intense drama, especially when the court began reading the order and the microphone was suddenly muted.
Senior Advocate P. Wilson, representing the Tamil Nadu government, was attending the hearing through video call. He couldn’t hear the court’s decision and requested the staff to “unmute the mic”. He also asked the judges to clarify if a stay had really been granted and whether any reasons were being recorded.
However, the judges replied casually, “there was no need to worry as the order would be uploaded soon.” But by Wednesday evening, the order had still not been uploaded.
The PIL was filed by advocate K. Venkatachalapathy. He argued that the 12 amendments passed by the Tamil Nadu government were unconstitutional. According to him, the changes clashed with the University Grants Commission (UGC) Regulations — which are central laws.
Venkatachalapathy said that as per UGC rules, the Governor (who is also the Chancellor of all state universities in Tamil Nadu) must appoint the Vice-Chancellors. But the new amendments wanted to remove the Governor’s role, which he claimed was illegal.
Senior lawyer Dama Seshadri Naidu, speaking for the petitioner, said that in Indian law, if there is a clash between central and state laws on a subject in the Concurrent List, the central law will always win.
“Since the UGC Regulations already govern the subject matter, the State’s amendments were unconstitutional,” he said.
On the other hand, the Tamil Nadu government, represented by Advocate General P.S. Raman and Senior Advocate P. Wilson, strongly opposed the High Court hearing the matter during the court’s summer vacation. They told the bench that the issue was already in the Supreme Court.
Wilson informed the court that he had told the Chief Justice of India (CJI) about this matter and had taken permission to inform the High Court about a pending transfer petition. He also questioned the urgency of the case.
He said, “This matter concerns universities. The Governor is waging a war against the State. What is the public interest in this petition? It is politically motivated.” He added that the petitioner is “a BJP district secretary from Tirunelveli”.
But the High Court bench asked, “Has the Supreme Court stopped us from hearing this case?” Wilson admitted that the Supreme Court had not issued any such order. So, the High Court decided to continue with the case and passed an interim stay order. This means that the Tamil Nadu government cannot implement the new amendments for now.
What Were the Amendments?
These changes were passed by the Tamil Nadu Assembly on April 11, 2025, just days after the Supreme Court’s judgment on April 8. That Supreme Court order had criticised Governor R.N. Ravi for delaying his approval of 12 important bills passed by the State Assembly — most of which were related to VC appointments.
ALSO READ: Supreme Court Rejects Plea to Remove Tamil Nadu Governor R N Ravi
Later, the Supreme Court accepted that 10 out of those 12 bills had valid assent. After that, the Tamil Nadu Assembly passed new laws, including changes to the Tamil Nadu Physical Education and Sports University Act.
These new laws gave more power to the State government in VC appointments. Some key changes were:
- The VC search committee would now have four members: two chosen by the State government (including a retired High Court judge and a senior IAS officer), one from the university syndicate, and no nominee from the Governor.
- The State government could set the eligibility rules for VCs.
- The search committee would send its recommendations directly to the government, not the Governor.
- The State government could also remove Vice-Chancellors from their posts.
- The law also took away the Governor’s power to accept or reject the decisions made by the university syndicate.
FOLLOW US FOR MORE LEGAL UPDATES ON YOUTUBE
