PROFESSOR (DR.) SREEJITH P.S. versus DR. RAJASREE M.S. & ORS.

PROFESSOR (DR.) SREEJITH P.S. versus DR. RAJASREE M.S. & ORS.

The UGC Regulations, having been adopted by the State and being subordinate legislation under the UGC Act, prevail over any repugnant State provisions; a Vice-Chancellor appointment made on the recommendation of a Search Committee not constituted in accordance with the applicable UGC Regulations and where only one...

Source-derived case information.

Parties
Appellant: Professor (Dr.) Sreejith P.S.; Respondent No. 1: Dr. Rajasree M.S.; Respondent: State of Kerala
Jurisdiction
India
Judgment Date
21 October 2022
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appeal to the Supreme Court Against High Court Dismissal of Writ Petition for Quo Warranto
Outcome
Appeal allowed.
Legal Topics
UGC Regulations, Vice Chancellor Appointment, Quo Warranto, Repugnancy Under Article 254
Constitutional Law Education Law Administrative Law UGC Regulations Vice Chancellor Appointment Quo Warranto Repugnancy Under Article 254

Source-derived case record

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Legal principles 3 Authorities cited 8 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Professor (Dr.) Sreejith P.S.

Appellant

Dr. Rajasree M.S.

Respondent No. 1

State of Kerala

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Appeal to the Supreme Court Against High Court Dismissal of Writ Petition for Quo Warranto

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether appointment of Vice-Chancellor should follow prevailing UGC Regulations or the State University Act, 2015
  2. 2 Whether the Search Committee constituted to recommend the Vice-Chancellor was duly constituted as per applicable law

Ratio Decidendi

The UGC Regulations, having been adopted by the State and being subordinate legislation under the UGC Act, prevail over any repugnant State provisions; a Vice-Chancellor appointment made on the recommendation of a Search Committee not constituted in accordance with the applicable UGC Regulations and where only one name was recommended instead of the required panel (3-5 or not less than three) is illegal and void ab initio, warranting issuance of a writ of quo warranto.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed.

Orders

  • Impugned judgments and orders of the High Court quashed and set aside.
  • Writ petition allowed.