The Supreme Court of India, in a significant ruling, has quashed the reappointment of Dr. Gopinath Ravindran as the Vice-Chancellor of Kannur University in Kerala, citing “unwarranted interference” by the state government. The bench, headed by Chief Justice of India DY Chandrachud and comprising Justices JB Pardiwala and Manoj Misra, emphasized that the decision-making process was vitiated by the state’s intervention.
The reappointment of Ravindran, which was initially issued through a notification on November 23, 2021, was challenged in the Kerala High Court by Premachandran Keezhoth and Shino P Jose, both members of the senate and academic council of Kannur University. The High Court had dismissed their petition in February last year, leading to an appeal in the Supreme Court.
The Supreme Court bench stated,
“Although the notification reappointing the respondent (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.”
Consequently, the notification dated November 23, 2021, reappointing Ravindran was quashed.
The apex court scrutinized the provisions of the Kannur University Act, 1996, and affirmed that only the chancellor is competent to appoint or reappoint the Vice-Chancellor. Any interference by the state government in this process was deemed “patently illegal” and capable of vitiating the decision-making process.
The bench also clarified that while reappointments in a tenure post are permissible, the age limit of 65 years does not automatically apply. Additionally, the judgment stressed that the reappointment procedure need not mirror that of a fresh appointment and emphasized the legal principle that a writ of quo warranto applies when an appointment violates statutory provisions.
Reacting to the verdict, Kerala Governor Arif Mohammed Khan, represented by Attorney General R Venkataramani, accused Chief Minister Pinarayi Vijayan of pressuring him to reappoint Ravindran. Khan stated,
“The higher education minister (R Bindu) used to write to me but all the pressure came from the office of the chief minister.”
In response, Bindu accepted the Supreme Court’s verdict, noting,
“The state government had sent a proposal in this regard based on the legal opinion of the AG. The responsibility of making the appointment rests with the governor. He has to use his wisdom and discretion to take a decision.”
This ruling by the Supreme Court underscores the importance of maintaining the autonomy of educational institutions and the sanctity of the appointment process, free from political interference.