Kerala HC upholds varsity norms on nominees in minority colleges

MGU provision on including govt., varsity nominees in minority educational institutions’ governing bodies will not restrict their rights, rules court on an appeal by a forum of Catholic institutions

Updated - July 28, 2022 08:38 pm IST

The Kerala High Court has held that the provisions of the Mahatma Gandhi University Act for including nominees of the government and the university in the governing body/managing committee of minority educational institutions would not in any manner trammel or restrict their rights to manage the affairs of their institutions in every manner they desire.

Justice Devan Ramachandran was closing recently a writ petition filed by the Consortium of Catholic Institutions of Higher Education in India challenging Sections 54 and 55 of the M.G. University Act. According to it, since both these bodies were vested with the management of the colleges, the ‘inclusion of two outsiders’ ― a nominee of the university and a nominee of the government ― would affect the functional autonomy of the minority institution, as guaranteed by Article 30(1) of the Constitution of India .

‘Only advisory role’

Surin George Ipe, counsel for M.G. University, submitted that apprehensions voiced by the petitioners in these cases were without any rational edifice because, the statutory ‘governing body’ or the ‘managing council,’ as the case may be, were distinct from the management. Their right was only to advise the management in all matters relating to the administration of the college.

The petitioner had challenged the circular of the university issued in 2020 mandating that the subject experts, to be included in the selection committee for selection of assistant professors, would only be chosen from a list suggested or approved by the governing body/managing council.

‘Wrong impression’

The counsel added that in the case of minority educational institutions, the subject experts were to be chosen by the chairperson of the college from two panels of five names each, recommended by the Vice Chancellor, who in turn, makes such recommendations from a panel approved by the statutory body of the college. The court observed that the impression of the petitioner was wholly wrong because, as was also admitted by the university, the functions of the ‘governing body’ or the ‘managing council’ was only to advise the management, especially when such advice was not binding on them.

0 / 0
Sign in to unlock member-only benefits!
  • Access 10 free stories every month
  • Save stories to read later
  • Access to comment on every story
  • Sign-up/manage your newsletter subscriptions with a single click
  • Get notified by email for early access to discounts & offers on our products
Sign in

Comments

Comments have to be in English, and in full sentences. They cannot be abusive or personal. Please abide by our community guidelines for posting your comments.

We have migrated to a new commenting platform. If you are already a registered user of The Hindu and logged in, you may continue to engage with our articles. If you do not have an account please register and login to post comments. Users can access their older comments by logging into their accounts on Vuukle.