The Supreme Court has made an unusual intervention in the appointment of vice chancellors in the Technological and Digital universities of Kerala. The Supreme Court made a significant move in the matter after efforts to resolve the differences of opinion between the Governor and the state government over the appointment of vice chancellors and reach a consensus failed. A bench comprising Justices J.B. Pardiwala and K.V. Viswanathan has said that the Supreme Court itself will announce the vice chancellors, effectively conveying the warning that it would step in if the authorities fail to do so impliedly through a consensus. The court has directed a committee headed by retired judge Sudhanshu Dhulia to prepare a priority list for the appointment of VCs in the two universities and submit it in a sealed cover by Wednesday. Along with this, the letter sent by the Chief Minister to the Governor on the appointment of VCs and the Governor’s reply to it are to be examined, and a joint report to be submitted. The court will announce the VCs on Thursday itself after examining both. The Governor, who is also the Chancellor of the universities in the state, has the authority to appoint VCs. In that sense, the court has taken over the appointment power of the Governor. And the circumstances that led to this were mainly created by the stubbornness of Governor Rajendra Arlekar. Therefore, this unexpected move by the court can be interpreted as a setback for the Lok Bhavan and, by extension, the central government.
The tussle between the state government and the Governor over the administration of Kerala’s universities, including the appointment of VCs, has been going on for years. This conflict is the result of the ‘governor rule’ drive launched by the Narendra Modi government against opposition-ruled states. By convention, governors generally accept the policies and programmes of their respective state governments despite political differences. However, the Modi government is now using Lok Bhavans as centres to control opposition states, including Kerala, which have taken positions against the Centre and the BJP. There are ample instances of parallel administrations initiated by Arif Mohammad Khan in Kerala, R.N. Ravi in Tamil Nadu and C.V. Ananda Bose in West Bengal, all of which have repeatedly thrown state administrative processes into disarray and uncertainty. It was in this context that universities also turned into arenas of conflict. It can be said that this began when the then Governor Arif Mohammad Khan’s wish to grant a D.Litt to the then President Ram Nath Kovind was turned down by the Kerala University and its Syndicate. There onwards, the Governor adopted a vindictive approach towards the government and the entire university administration. This paved the way for an open confrontation between the Governor and the government. When the Governor’s move to include Sangh Parivar campaigners in the Senates of Kerala and Calicut universities led to major protests, he responded in a dictatorial manner. He aggravated the situation by writing to registrars directing them to immediately nominate university representatives to the search committees for the appointment of vice chancellors in eight universities in the state, and further complicated matters by forwarding the University Amendment Bill to the President without signing it.
Arlekar, who took over as Governor after Arif Mohammad Khan, gave new dimensions to the ‘chancellor rule’ campaign initiated by his predecessor. He began that by introducing the image of ‘Bharatamba' in the Senate Hall of the University of Kerala. He did not hesitate to have the registrar who raised objections suspended through a temporary vice chancellor. When this Acting VC went on a foreign trip, the Governor took retaliatory action by reinstating, for four days, a person who had earlier been removed by the state government. Kerala is currently being run by in-charge VCs. Out of the 14 universities where the Governor is the Chancellor, 13 are being headed by temporary vice chancellors. This has brought the functioning of universities to a standstill. A few months ago, the High Court itself expressed concern over this situation and criticised the Governor’s unnecessary interventions. Even then, he did not agree to review the matter. Despite several opportunities to reach a consensus on the appointment of vice chancellors in the Technological and Digital universities, and despite various compromises made by the state government at one stage, Arlekar persisted with an uncompromising Sangh Parivar line. What the Supreme Court has done now is the natural response to this. Can one expect the Governor to take this setback as a lesson?