Kerala Governor Rajendra Arlekar has raised objections to the Supreme Court’s decision to intervene in the appointment of Vice Chancellors of State Universities, stating that as per the University Grants Commission (UGC) Act, the authority to appoint Vice Chancellors lies with the Chancellor.

The Governor’s remarks come in the context of the Supreme Court’s recent decision to step in and select Vice Chancellors for APJ Abdul Kalam Technological University and the University of Digital Sciences, Innovation and Technology. The intervention was made due to a prolonged deadlock between the Kerala State Government and the Governor over the appointments. Under the respective State legislations, the Governor functions as the Chancellor of these universities.

A Bench comprising Justice J.B. Pardiwala and Justice K.V. Viswanathan had earlier constituted a committee led by former Supreme Court judge Justice Sudhanshu Dhulia to suggest a panel of eligible candidates to both the State Government and the Governor. However, as no agreement could be reached on the recommended names, the Court last week directed the committee to submit the shortlisted candidates to the Supreme Court in a sealed cover. The matter is scheduled to be taken up again on December 18.

Speaking at a public event, Governor Arlekar questioned the Court’s approach and referred to the Supreme Court’s 2023 judgment in the Kannur University case, where the reappointment of a Vice Chancellor was struck down due to what the Court described as “unwarranted interference by the Government.”

The Governor remarked that courts directly making appointments, despite University Acts clearly vesting such powers in the Chancellor, sets an unhealthy precedent. He stated that the Kannur University judgment had reaffirmed the authority of the UGC and the Chancellor in the appointment process, but expressed concern that similar legal principles were later being overlooked.

Emphasising respect for established institutional frameworks, the Governor stated that universities, the UGC, and the Chancellor’s role must be allowed to function as intended by law, warning that judicial overreach in such matters could undermine institutional autonomy.