On Wednesday evening, the Madras High Court awarded the interim residence on disputed provisions that authorizes the government of Tamil Nadu to appoint vice -chairmen to state universities and stopped the recent legislative changes of the state that transferred this power from Governor to the Chief Minister.
The divisional bench composed of justice Gr Swaminathan and Lakshmi Narayanan passed through an order for a stay despite the opposition of the government of Tamil Nadu, which urged the court to postpone the matter until Friday. The government claimed that the case was prematurely initiated, especially because the related petition awaits before the Supreme Court. However, the Court continued to negotiate and issued a temporary relief.
The petitions questioning changes were filed by a lawyer and a BJP official to Venkatakhalapath through a lawsuit (Pil). The petitioner claimed that state legislative changes were violated by the University Grants Act (UGC) and its regulations that require the vice-chairman to be named through the Chancellor’s consent-in-Chancer’s consent. The petitioner also claimed that the changes were arbitrary and lacked transparency, undermining the autonomy of educational institutions by provoking appointment in political hands.
The Tamil Government adopted ten additional acts after the Supreme Court’s decision, which allowed the State Legislative choir to re -enact laws until the governor and consent and said that it “considered the judge” under Article 142 of the Constitution. These changes have replaced the links to the “Chancellor” “by the government”, which effectively removed the role of the governor in the university administration.
During the hearing, the head of the lawyer P Wilson, representing the state, he claimed that the role of the governor as the Chancellor remained intact and that the changes were not presented by UGC regulations that expressly order the governors to be Chancellors. Wilson also argued that the petitioner had submitted a notice of a counterfeit Journal and called on the state authorities of the state.
The petitioner advisor, head of the defending champion Dama Naida, faced that education matters should be isolated from political influence and entrusted to the powers of guerrilla reflections. He called on the court to remain in amendments, and quoted precedents where the courts hit to limit arbitrary executive actions.
The interim stay is an important legal obstacle to the ruling government of DMK, which faced the permanent opposition of Governor RN Ravi over these changes. The governor previously protested against the movement of the state and claimed that he had undermined constitutional conventions and federal balance.
The case is underlined by the ongoing Tussle between the state government and the governor of the control of academic institutions and raises wider issues concerning the autonomy of universities and the role of political authorities in their administration.
The Madras High Court ordered both state and central governments to file detailed answers. This matter is scheduled for further hearing in the coming days, although the Supreme Court is considering whether to transfer the case for decisions together with related petitions.
(Tagstotranslate) Madras High Court
