Karnataka High Court
Credit: DH File Photo
Bengaluru: The Karnataka High Court has quashed the appointment of Dr BK Meera as the acting Vice-Chancellor of Maharani Cluster University, Bengaluru.
Justice R Nataraj observed that the discretion vested with the Chancellor does not mean that he can appoint any person other than a Dean/Director as the acting Vice-Chancellor as provided under section 16 (2) of Karnataka State Universities Act (KSU) Act.
Meera’s appointment was challenged by Dr T M Manjunath, Director of the School of Humanities and Liberal Arts at the University and also an aspirant to the post. She was appointed as acting VC on March 28, 2025 as Dr Ushadevi C was to retire on March 31, 2025.
The petitioner contended that he was eligible to be appointed as acting Vice Chancellor as the list of senior most directors, were working in various Schools in the Maharani Cluster University, he was at the top being appointed as the Director on October 16, 2023.
On the other hand, it was submitted on behalf of the Chancellor’s office (office of the Governor) that Meera is the senior most Professor in the Zoology department and the appointment was with an intent to better understand the academic and psychological needs of the girl students. The office of the Chancellor also placed reliance on Section 14(4) of the KSU Act, which expressly mandates the appointment of a woman as Vice-Chancellor in the case of a Women's University.
Justice Nataraj noted that as per section 16 (2) of KSU Act, only the senior most Dean has to be appointed as the acting Vice-Chancellor. The court further said that the discretion vested with the Chancellor does not mean that he can appoint any person other than a Dean/Director as the acting Vice-Chancellor. The court also pointed out that the communication sent by the Special Secretary to the Governor, calling for the list, did not restrict it to women candidates.
“This apart, there is nothing on record to establish that the Maharani Cluster University is a Women University, where the Vice-Chancellor should be a woman as in the case of Akkamahadevi University. A perusal of the notification under challenge does not show that this was the reason for not considering the case of the petitioner. Similarly, it was not mentioned therein that there was any irregularity or illegality in appointing the petitioner as a Director and therefore, he was not considered. Therefore, the Chancellor cannot now supplement reasons to sustain the impugned notification,” Justice Nataraj said.
Insofar as the petitioner’s prayer to appoint him to the post, the court said that the Chancellor of Universities (the Governor) is at liberty to consider appointing acting Vice-Chancellor in accordance with section 16(2). If the petitioner is eligible, the Chancellor may consider appointing him in accordance with law, the court said, while partly allowing the petition.