Follow TNM's WhatsApp channel for news updates and story links.
The Supreme Court expressed its displeasure after learning that the Kerala Governor is yet to examine a report submitted by former Supreme Court judge Sudhanshu Dhulia on the long-delayed appointment of regular vice chancellors to two state-run universities on November 28, Friday. The bench, led by Justice JB Pardiwala and Justice KV Viswanathan, remarked that a document prepared by a retired judge of the apex court cannot be brushed aside as routine paperwork, particularly when the Governor serves as Chancellor of the APJ Abdul Kalam Technological University and the University of Digital Sciences Innovation and Technology.
During the hearing, the court questioned why Kerala Governor Rajendra Arlekar had not reviewed the report forwarded by the Chief Minister. Senior advocate Jaideep Gupta, representing the state government, informed the bench that despite receiving the committee’s findings, the Chancellor had taken no steps towards a final decision. This prompted Justice Pardiwala to directly ask why the Governor had not even looked at the report.
The judicial intervention stems from a prolonged stand-off between the state government and the Governor over filling the top academic posts. In August, the Supreme Court appointed Justice Dhulia to lead a search-cum-selection committee, directing that the panel’s shortlisted candidates be placed first before the Chief Minister, who would then forward his preferred order of names to the Chancellor.
The arrangement was crafted after the court noted a breakdown in the usual appointment process. It also came in the backdrop of the Governor’s challenge to a Kerala High Court ruling that had struck down his unilateral appointment of an interim vice-chancellor without the state’s recommendation.
Tensions escalated further in September when the Governor sought a modification of the Supreme Court’s order, arguing that neither university laws nor UGC regulations assigned any role to the Chief Minister in choosing vice chancellors. His plea argued that allowing such involvement would amount to a conflict of interest.
The latest exchange in court has renewed focus on the broader debate over gubernatorial delays and their impact on federal functioning, an issue that gained momentum after Justice Pardiwala’s earlier judgment on the limits of timelines for Governors in processing state legislation.
In its brief order as reported by LiveLaw, the bench underscored that the appointment process had already moved forward with the consent of all sides. “In due deference to our order dated 18.08.2025, Hon’ble Justice Sudhanshu Dhulia, former Judge of this Court, undertook the necessary exercise and has prepared a report accordingly,” the bench recorded, noting that the document had travelled from the committee to the Chief Minister and finally to the Chancellor’s office.
The judges questioned the explanation offered on behalf of the Governor that related documents had not yet reached the Raj Bhavan. “We fail to understand why the non-receipt of the records is coming in the way for the purpose of looking into the report filed by the committee,” the order stated, making it clear that the Chancellor was expected to act on the recommendations without further delay.
When the Governor’s counsel attempted to advance additional arguments, Justice Pardiwala halted him, stressing the gravity of the committee’s work. “This is not just an ordinary piece of paper. A former judge of the Supreme Court has looked into it. So you are to look into the report and take an appropriate call,” he said, adding that the court would review the Chancellor’s eventual decision when it is placed before the bench next Friday, December 5.