The Supreme Court on Friday issued notice on a petition filed by the State of Tamil Nadu challenging a Madras High Court order that stayed the operation of nine State laws concerning the appointment of Vice-Chancellors in public universities [The State of Tamil Nadu & Anr v. K Venkatachalapathy @ Kutty & Ors].
These laws had received the Governor's deemed assent through the apex court's April 8 verdict.
A Bench of Justices PS Narasimha and R Mahadevan tagged the matter with a transfer petition filed earlier by the State seeking to shift the underlying case out of the High Court.
It refused to stay the High Court order, but has agreed to examine the issue after responses are filed. The State’s prayer for interim relief remains pending.
The Court hinted that the transfer plea was likely to be listed after the summer recess and observed that parties were free to move the Chief Justice of India for an expedited hearing.
The order under challenge was passed by the High Court on May 21 on a writ petition filed by BJP leader K Venkatachalapathy.
Appearing before the Supreme Court today, Senior Advocate Dr Abhishek Manu Singhvi, appearing for the State, argued that the stay was granted despite the Supreme Court’s April 8 ruling that the bills in question had received deemed assent from Governor RN Ravi under Article 200 of the Constitution. Following that ruling, the nine Acts were formally notified by the State. He contended that the High Court ought not to have stayed duly enacted laws, particularly in the absence of any pleaded urgency.
The laws in question transfer the authority to appoint Vice-Chancellors in State universities from the Governor to the State government. These include amendments to the governing laws of several universities such as the Tamil Nadu Agricultural University, Dr MGR Medical University, Tamil Nadu Fisheries University and Dr Ambedkar Law University, among others.
Opposing the State's plea, Solicitor General Tushar Mehta submitted that the State laws were inconsistent with the University Grants Commission (UGC) Regulations, 2018, and were therefore invalid for repugnancy with central law.