The Supreme Court on Thursday (December 18) expressed satisfaction over the Kerala Chief Minister and the Governor arriving at a consensus for appointing regular Vice Chancellors to two key State universities, bringing an end to a prolonged impasse.

The appointments had remained stalled for several months due to differences between the State Government and the Governor. To resolve the deadlock, the Court had earlier constituted a committee headed by Justice (Retd.) Sudhanshu Dhulia. When the committee’s efforts also failed to yield a resolution, the Court indicated last week that it would itself proceed to make the appointments. Soon after this indication, the authorities agreed on the names, ahead of the scheduled hearing.

On December 18, a Bench comprising Justice J.B. Pardiwala and Justice K.V. Viswanathan was informed that a consensus had finally been reached between the Kerala Governor and the State Government. Dr. Saji Gopinathan was appointed as Vice Chancellor of APJ Abdul Kalam Technological University, while Dr. Ciza Thomas was appointed as Vice Chancellor of the University of Digital Sciences, Innovation and Technology.

At the outset, Attorney General R. Venkataramani, appearing for the Kerala Governor, submitted that the issue had been conclusively resolved and the decision had been conveyed to Justice Dhulia. Senior Advocate Jaideep Gupta, representing the State Government, however, objected to the fact that the appointments were notified while the matter was still pending before the Court.

Responding to this, Justice Pardiwala observed, “Let’s put an end to this. The appointments have been made.” The Bench emphasised that its primary concern was that universities should not function without regular Vice Chancellors, as such uncertainty directly affects students and other stakeholders.

Recording its satisfaction, the Court noted that after its order dated December 11, there were positive developments, highlighting how timely and decisive judicial intervention can safeguard citizens’ rights. The Bench observed that the two prominent universities in Kerala, engaged in cutting-edge disciplines, had been functioning without permanent leadership due to the lack of consensus between the Governor and the State Government, leaving students, parents, faculty, staff and affiliated bodies caught in the crossfire.

Following the approach adopted earlier in a similar dispute from West Bengal, the Court had appointed former Supreme Court judge Justice Sudhanshu Dhulia as Chairperson of the Search and Selection Committee, entrusting him with the task of recommending panels of at least three names for Vice Chancellor appointments in the two universities.

The Court recorded with satisfaction that both the Chancellor and the State Government jointly informed that the Vice Chancellors had been appointed from the panel recommended by the committee. The Bench placed on record its gratitude to Justice Dhulia for his role in the process.

Emphasising its objective, the Court stated that ensuring permanent leadership in educational institutions was essential to protect the interests of all stakeholders. It appreciated the conduct of the authorities for acting in aid of the Court’s orders in the true spirit of the Constitution, particularly Article 144. The Bench also commended Attorney General R. Venkataramani, Senior Advocate Jaideep Gupta, and their respective teams for contributing to what it described as a “very happy ending to this saga,” while keeping all questions of law open.

After the order was pronounced, the Attorney General informed the Court that it was the Governor who had taken the initiative to invite the Chief Minister for discussions, leading to the consensus. In response, Justice Pardiwala remarked that he hoped such dialogue would continue “over a mug of coffee” in the larger public interest. Gupta also acknowledged that without the Court’s timely intervention, a consensus may not have been possible.

Earlier, the Court had warned that if the Governor and the State Government failed to resolve the issue, it would step in to make the appointments itself. The Chancellor had proposed the names of Dr. Ciza Thomas and Dr. Priya Chandran for the two universities, to which the State Government had objected to Dr. Thomas’s appointment.

The Court had previously criticised delays on the part of the Governor in acting on the recommendations submitted by Justice Dhulia’s committee and had urged a prompt decision. In August, the Court had constituted the search committee in view of the stalemate and had directed the Chancellor to make appointments in the same order of preference as recommended by the Chief Minister.

The dispute arose from a Special Leave Petition filed by the Governor, in his capacity as Chancellor of the Technological University, challenging a Kerala High Court judgment that quashed the appointment of a temporary Vice Chancellor made without the State Government’s recommendation. On July 30, the Supreme Court had urged both sides to resolve the matter amicably and clarified that until regular appointments were made, the Governor could reappoint the existing temporary Vice Chancellors.

Subsequently, the reappointment of interim Vice Chancellors Dr. Ciza Thomas and Dr. K. Sivaprasad was challenged by the State Government, leading to further litigation.

Background

The Kerala High Court had held that the Governor, acting as Chancellor, could appoint a temporary Vice Chancellor only on the recommendation of the State Government and for a maximum period of six months. Temporary appointments made in November 2024 were quashed by a Single Judge on May 19, a decision later upheld by a Division Bench on July 14.

The High Court relied on Section 13(7) of the Technological University Act, which permits the Chancellor to appoint a temporary Vice Chancellor only from among specified officials recommended by the State Government and only for a limited duration.

Case Details: The Chancellor, APJ Abdul Kalam Technological University v. State of Kerala & Ors. | SLP(C) No. 20680–20681/2025