West Bengal govt cannot usurp power of chancellor in appointment of VC of Calcutta University: SC
The Supreme Court Tuesday upheld a Calcutta High Court verdict setting aside the reappointment of Sonali Chakravarti Banerjee as the vice-chancellor of Calcutta University, saying the West Bengal government had chosen an incorrect path under the law to "usurp" the power of the chancellor, who is the governor of the state.
A bench of Justices DY Chandrachud and Hima Kohli, while dismissing the appeal of the Trinamool Congress-led state government said, "We hold that the judgment of the High Court is correct in law and in fact and does not warrant interference in appeal. The State government could not have issued the order re-appointing the VC."
The top court said the high court was justified in coming to the conclusion that "in the guise of removing the difficulties, the State cannot change the scheme and essential provisions of the Act". The bench said that faced with the non-agreeable view of the Chancellor on the appointment of Banerjee, the state government had attempted to get around the situation by purporting to exercise its powers under Section 60 of the Calcutta University Act of 1979 which contemplated a situation where in case of any difficulty, the state was empowered to take necessary steps for removing such obstacles.
It said, "The State government chose the incorrect path under Section 60 by misusing the "removal of difficulty clause" to usurp the power of the Chancellor to make the appointment. A government cannot misuse the "removal of difficulty clause" to remove all obstacles in its path which arise due to statutory restrictions". West Bengal's Mamata Banerjee government was locked in a bitter feud with then governor Jagdeep Dhankhar, now the Vice President of India, over many issues, including the running of state universities, when the VC was reappointed.
The top court added that allowing such actions would be antithetical to the rule of law and misusing the limited power granted to make minor adaptations and peripheral adjustments in a statute for making its implementation effective to side-step the provisions of the statute altogether would defeat the purpose of the legislation. The bench said it is a settled principle of law that a statute must be read to avoid a construction that would make certain provisions or terms meaningless or redundant.
The bench, while referring to the provisions on the reappointment of the vice-chancellor said, "There is neither an express provision nor a necessary intendment by which it could be inferred that the power which is entrusted to the Chancellor to appoint a VC is taken away in the case of a reappointment." There is no intrinsic reason or rationale to accept the interpretation which has been urged on behalf of the State of West Bengal that there is no need for the approval of the chancellor in case of reappointment, it said.
"A reappointment is the appointment of an existing incumbent who fulfills the conditions of eligibility. The fulfillment of the conditions makes a person eligible for reappointment. The power of appointment including reappointment is entrusted to the Chancellor and not to the State government," the bench said. It added the amended provisions of Section 8(2)(a) of the Calcutta University Act cannot, therefore, be construed to mean that the power of reappointment has been taken away from the Chancellor and entrusted to the State government.
"Reading the provisions in such a manner would make the provisions entrusting the power of appointment of the VC with the Chancellor redundant," it said and added while the eligibility for appointment of VC is indeed determined by the state government’s satisfaction, the power of making the appointment continues to vest in the Chancellor. It added, "The Chancellor has been described in Section 7(1) as the head of the University. The power of appointing a VC is vested by Section 8(1)(b) in the Chancellor".
On September 13, the Calcutta High Court set aside the reappointment of Banerjee as the vice-chancellor, holding the West Bengal government has no authority to do so as per the provisions of the varsity's Act. The verdict was pronounced on a PIL by an alumnus of the university.
Banerjee was appointed as the vice-chancellor of Calcutta University on August 28, 2017 for four years and her term expired on August 27, 2021. Her tenure was extended by three months by the Chancellor with a rider that the selection process would commence and the vice-chancellor would be appointed following the due process. Thereafter, a notification dated August 27, 2021 was issued under the signature of the special secretary of the West Bengal government's Higher Education Department whereby Banerjee was reappointed as the vice-chancellor with effect from August 28, 2021 for four years.
ALSO READ | Supreme Court agrees to list plea challenging 'Article 370 abrogation' after Dussehra break
ALSO READ | Owners of around 500 shops near Taj Mahal fear closing of business after Supreme Court order
Latest India News