WP(C) Nos. 335 & 703 of 2023, Dr. T. Muhammedali v. University of Calicut; Prof. Dr. N. Prasantha Kumar v. Sree Sankaracharya University of Sanskrit, High Court of Kerala at Ernakulam

Case Details & Bench

Court: High Court of Kerala
Hon'ble Judges: Mohammed Nias C.P.
Judgment Date: 2024-04-05
Court Decision / Holding: In view of the foregoing, both WP(C) Nos. 335/2023 and 703/2023 are closed. The Chancellor’s earlier void-ab-initio findings and subsequent developments render the quo warranto challenge academic in the circumstances; maintainability issues are acknowledged but no further adjudication is necessary on the merits of the original appointments. The court leaves open the question of 146A applicability and clarifies that quo warranto remains a permissible instrument but does not pursue it where actions already taken render the question moot.
Final Disposition: Petitions closed; writ petitions disposed of without adjudicating the merits of the appointments; proceedings deemed academic in light of subsequent Chancellor orders and changes in status of the VCs.

Parties to the Case

Appellants / Petitioners

Dr. T. Muhammedali
Prof. Dr. N. Prasantha Kumar

Respondents

Dr. M. K. Jayaraj (Vice-Chancellor, University of Calicut)
The Chancellor, University of Calicut
The University of Calicut
Dr. M. V. Narayanan
The Chancellor, Sree Sankaracharya University of Sanskrit
Sree Sankaracharya University of Sanskrit

Legal Representation & Advocates

Counsels for Petitioners

• Nisha George
• A.L. Navaneeth Krishnan
• George Poonthottam (Sr.)
• Sidharth R. Wariyar

Counsels for Respondents

• Amal Kasha
• Sri P.C. Sasidharan (SC)
• S. Prasanth
• T.B. Hood
• M. Isha
• Sri M.P. Sreekrishnan
• Sri S. Prasanth (SC)
• Sri P. Sreekumar (Sr)
• Sri Dinesh Mathew
• J. Murikan (SC)
• A. Muhammed Musthafa

Case Synopsis & Summary

Two writ petitions (WP(C) Nos. 335/2023 and 703/2023) at the High Court of Kerala challenge the appointment of vice-chancellors to two state universities on grounds of non-compliance with statutory safeguards. WP(C)335/2023 concerns Dr. M. K. Jayaraj’s appointment as Vice Chancellor of the University of Calicut; WP(C)703/2023 concerns Dr. M.V. Narayanan’s appointment as Vice Chancellor of the Sree Sankaracharya University of Sanskrit. The petitions allege violations of UGC Regulations 2018 and of the law as interpreted by Supreme Court judgments. Initially, Chancellor notices and interim court orders created a provisional stay on the appointments, while the Chancellor later held the appointments to be void ab initio and directed vacatur, after prior directions in related matters. The court discusses maintainability of quo warranto, referencing Rajesh Awasthi v. Nand Lal Jaiswal to affirm that quo warranto lies to challenge public appointments, even when made contrary to statutory regulations, and that locus and delay should be liberally construed. Given subsequent developments—e.g., Narayanan’s removal and Jayaraj’s continuation under stay—the court concludes there is nothing substantial to adjudicate in WP703/2023. Ultimately, both writ petitions are closed, with observations that the questions may be academic, while leaving open the applicability of 146A of the High Court Rules. The judgment emphasizes liberal considerations of locus and the evolving administrative actions taken by the Chancellor.

Provisions of Law Cited

UGC Regulations 2018146A of the High Court Rules

Legal Doctrines & Maxims

res integra
locus in quo (liberal interpretation of locus standi)

Cited Precedents (1)

Case Name	Citation	Treatment	Explanation
Rajesh Awasthi v. Nand Lal Jaiswal	(2013) 1 SCC 501	Positive	Cited to support the proposition that quo warranto proceedings are maintainable to challenge public appointments even if those appointments contravene statutory regulations; the court endorses liberal locus and timeliness in such challenges.

Extracted Judgment Text

Exact text extracted from official judgment records.

## **IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM** ## **PRESENT** **THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE MOHAMMED NIAS C.P.** **FRIDAY, THE 5[TH] DAY OF APRIL 2024 / 16TH CHAITHRA, 1946** **WP(C) NO. 335 OF 2023** ## **PETITIONER:** **DR. T. MUHAMMEDALI, AGED 55 YEARS S/O. T. MAMMY, ASSOCIATE PROFESSOR, FAROOK COLLEGE, KOZHIKKODE, FAROOK COLLEGE P.O., KOZHIKKODE DISTRICT., PIN - 673632** **BY ADVS. NISHA GEORGE GEORGE POONTHOTTAM (SR.) A.L.NAVANEETH KRISHNAN SIDHARTH.R.WARIYAR** ## **RESPONDENTS:** **1 DR. M. K. JAYARAJ VICE-CHANCELLOR, UNIVERSITY OF CALICUT CALICUT UNIVERSITY P.O., THENJIPALAM, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT, PIN - 673635 2 THE CHANCELLOR, UNIVERSITY OF CALICUT, KERALA RAJ BHAVAN, KERALA GOVERNOR'S CAMP P.O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM., PIN - 695009 3 THE UNIVERSITY OF CALICUT CALICUT UNIVERSITY P.O., THENJIPALAM, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT, REPRESENTED BY ITS REGISTRAR., PIN - 673635 BY ADVS. AMAL KASHA SRI.P.C.SASIDHARAN, SC, CALICUT UNIVERSITY S.PRASANTH T.B.HOOD(K/000253/1998) M.ISHA(K/001052/1998)** **THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON** **20.03.2024, ALONG WITH WP(C).703/2023, THE COURT ON 05.04.2024 DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:** -2- WP(C)Nos.335 & 703 of 2023 ## **IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM** ## **PRESENT** **THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE MOHAMMED NIAS C.P.** **FRIDAY, THE 5[TH] DAY OF APRIL 2024 / 16TH CHAITHRA, 1946 WP(C) NO. 703 OF 2023** ## **PETITIONER:** **PROF. DR. N. PRASANTHA KUMAR, AGED 65 YEARS S/O. LATE K. NARAYANAN, SIVASAKTHI, FRIENDS' VALLEY, THRIKKAKARA POST, KOCHI, PIN - 682021** **BY ADVS. NISHA GEORGE A.L.NAVANEETH KRISHNAN GEORGE POONTHOTTAM (SR.) SIDHARTH.R.WARIYAR** ## **RESPONDENTS:** |**1**|**DR. M. V. NARAYANAN**| |---|---| ||**VICE-CHANCELLOR,**| ||**SREE SANKARACHARYA UNIVERSITY OF SANSKRIT,**| ||**KALADY,**| ||**ERNAKULAM DISTRICT, PIN - 683574**| |**2**|**THE CHANCELLOR**| ||**SREE SANKARACHARYA UNIVERSITY OF SANSKRIT,**| ||**KERALA RAJ BHAVAN,**| ||**KERALA GOVERNOR'S CAMP P.O.,**| ||**THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN - 695009**| |**3**|**SREE SANKARACHARYA UNIVERSITY OF SANSKRIT**| ||**KALADY, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT,**| -3- WP(C)Nos.335 & 703 of 2023 **REPRESENTED BY ITS REGISTRAR, PIN - 683574** **BY ADVS. R1 BY SRI.M.P.SREEKRISHNAN SRI.S.PRASANTH,SC** **SRI.P.SREEKUMAR (SR) SRI.DINESH MATHEW J MURIKAN, SC A.MUHAMMED MUSTHAFA(K/859-A/2015)** **THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 20.03.2024, ALONG WITH WP(C).335/2023, THE COURT ON 05.04.2024 DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:** -4- WP(C)Nos.335 & 703 of 2023 ## **MOHAMMED NIAS C.P., J** **............................................................** ## **WP(C)Nos.335 & 703 of 2023** ............................................................. Dated this the 5[th] day of April, 2024 ## **JUDGMENT** WP(C) No.703/2023 is filed challenging the appointment of the first respondent Dr. M.V. Narayanan as Vice Chancellor of Sree Sankaracharya University of Sanskrit. 2. W(C)No.335/2023 is filed challenging the appointment of the first respondent Dr.M.K.Jayaraj as the Vice Chancellor of the University of Calicut. 3. Both these writ petitions are filed seeking a writ of quo warranto on the ground that their appointments were made in violation of the requirements of the law, in particular, the UGC Regulations 2018 as interpreted by the judgments of the Supreme Court of India. These writ petitions were preferred at a time when the Chancellor had issued -5- WP(C)Nos.335 & 703 of 2023 notices asking them to show cause as to why their appointments should not be declared as void ab initio being in violation of the UGC Regulations 2018. The Chancellor had not taken a decision and they were continuing on the strength of the interim orders passed by this Court. 4. In response to the prayers in the writ of quo warranto, the respondents had taken up the contentions including the maintainability of the petition and also reasons to sustain their appointments. It was further urged that the writ petitions must be taken as a species of Public Interest Litigation and therefore an affidavit in terms of 146 A of the High Court Rules must be complied with and the writ petition filed without the same must be dismissed. 5. Thereafter, by the judgment in the writ petitions filed by the Vice Chancellors as WP(C)Nos.35005 of 2022 and connected cases, this Court vide judgment dated 25.2.2024 had directed the Chancellor to hear the parties and take a decision on the question of the legality of their appointments and continuance as Vice Chancellors. Pursuant to the said direction, orders were passed on 7.3.2024 by the Chancellor holding that the appointments of the Vice Chancellors were void ab initio and directed them to vacate the office forthwith. -6- WP(C)Nos.335 & 703 of 2023 6. Challenging the said decision of the Chancellor, the Vice Chancellor of the Calicut University Dr M.K.Jayaraj filed WP(C)No.10520/2024 while the Vice Chancellor of the Sree Sankaracharya University of Sanskrit Dr M.V.Narayanan filed WP(C)No.10667/2024. Operation of the order of the Chancellor was stayed in WP(C)No.10520/2024, thus enabling Dr.M.K.Jayaraj ( first respondent in WP(C)No. 335/2023) to continue. The order of the Chancellor removing Dr. M.V. Narayanan (first respondent in WP(C)No.703/2023) as Vice Chancellor of the Sree Sankaracharya University of Sanskrit was not stayed. Because of the above developments, respondent No.1 in WP(C)No.703/2023 is no longer the Vice Chancellor, leaving nothing to be considered in WP(C)No.703/2023. 7. As regards the question as to whether the writ petition is maintainable, the same is no longer _res integra_ [See in this Connection the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in **Rajesh Awasthi v. Nand Lal Jaiswa** l [(2013) 1 SCC 501]. Any appointment to a public office made even in contravention of the statutory regulations can be considered in a writ of quo warranto. The locus in such cases or the aspect of delay and laches also has to be liberally construed. -7- WP(C)Nos.335 & 703 of 2023 8. Though the writ petition seeking quo warranto is maintainable, in the wake of the order passed by the Chancellor as stated above and the orders in the writ petitions filed by the respondents in these cases, a writ of quo warranto need not be considered in the facts of the case. The question as to whether it must be treated as Public Interest Litigation or whether the requirement of the applicability of 146A of the High Court Rules is not being decided as it has become academic. The contentions raised by the parties in that regard are left open. In view of the above, both these writ petitions are closed. **MOHAMMED NIAS C.P.** **JUDGE** dlk/27.3.2024 -8- WP(C)Nos.335 & 703 of 2023 ## **APPENDIX OF WP(C) 703/2023** ## **PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS** **EXHIBIT-P1 COPY OF THE SHOW CAUSE NOTICE BEARING NO. GS6-1225/2022 DATED 24.10.2022 ISSUED TO THE 1ST RESPONDENT.** **EXHIBIT-P2 COPY OF THE NOTIFICATION NO.GS6-1286/2021 DATED 02.09.2021 ISSUED FROM THE GOVERNORS SECRETARIAT APPOINTING THE SEARCH COMMITTEE EXHIBIT-P3 THE NOTE FILE OF THE OFFICE OF THE CHANCELLOR IN THIS REGARD DATED 09.11.2021.** - **EXHIBIT-P4 COPY OF THE SAID PROCEEDINGS BEARING NOTIFICATION NO.GS6-1286/2021(1) DATED 05.11.2021 ISSUED FROM THE GOVERNORS SECRETARIAT.** **EXHIBIT-P5 COPY OF THE PROCEEDINGS OF THE SEARCH COMMITTEE DATED 06.12.2021 .** **EXHIBIT-P6 COPY OF THE NOTIFICATION NO.GS5-1286/2021(3) DATED 07.03.2022 ISSUED FROM THE GOVERNORS SECRETARIAT .** **EXHIBIT-P7 COPY OF THE BIO-DATA GIVEN BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT TO THE SEARCH COMMITTEE DATED 09.11.2021. EXHIBIT-P8 COPY OF THE ORDER IN REVIEW PETITION (C) NOS. 1442-1443 OF 2022 IN C.A. NOS. 7634-7635/2022 DATED 07.12.2022 ISSUED BY THE HON'BLE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA.** ## **RESPONDENTS EXHIBITS** **EXHIBIT R1(A) A TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT, DATED 11.10.2011 IN WP(C) 32373 OF 2010** -9- WP(C)Nos.335 & 703 of 2023 |**EXHIBIT R1(B)**|**A TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT, DATED 29.11.2011**| |---|---| ||**IN WA NO. 1626 OF 2011**| |**EXHIBIT R1(C)**|**A TRUE COPY OF THE NOTIFICATION, DATED**| ||**02.09.2021 ISSUED BY THE GOVERNOR'S**| ||**SECRETARIAT KERALA RAJ BHAVAN**| |**EXHIBIT R1(D)**|**A TRUE COPY OF THE NOTIFICATION DATED**| ||**05.11.2021 ISSUED BY THE GOVERNOR'S**| ||**SECRETARIAT KERALA RAJ BHAVAN**| |**EXHIBIT R1(E)**|**A TRUE COPY OF THE NOTIFICATION, DATED**| ||**09.09.2021, ISSUED BY THE ADDITIONAL CHIEF**| ||**SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, HIGHER EDUCATION**| ||**DEPARTMENT**| |**EXHIBIT R1(F)**|**A TRUE COPY OF THE MINUTES OF THE MEETINGS OF**| ||**THE SEARCH CUM-SELECTION COMMITTEE, DATED**| ||**06.12.2021**| |**EXHIBIT R1(G)**|**A TRUE COPY OF THE NOTIFICATION, DATED**| ||**03.07.2022 OF APPOINTMENT OF THIS RESPONDENT**| |**EXHIBIT R1(H)**|**A TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION FORM SUBMITTED**| ||**BY THIS RESPONDENT PURSUANT TO EXHIBIT P2**| ||**NOTIFICATION**| |**EXHIBIT R1(I)**|**A TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER SANCTIONING LEAVE TO**| ||**THE PETITIONER, DATED 02.05.2018**| |**EXHIBIT R1(J)**|**A TRUE COPY OF THE TERMS AND CONDITIONS OF**| ||**FELLOWSHIP OF THE INDIAN INSTITUTE OF ADVANCE**| ||**STUDY**| |**EXHIBIT R1(K)**|**A TRUE COPY OF THE COMMON JUDGMENT, DATED**| ||**24.10.2022 IN WP(C) 33823/22**| -10- WP(C)Nos.335 & 703 of 2023 ## **APPENDIX OF WP(C) 335/2023** ## **PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS** **EXHIBIT-P1 TRUE COPY OF THE SHOW CAUSE NOTICE NO. GS6-1225/2022 DATED 24.10.2022 ISSUED TO THE 1ST RESPONDENT . EXHIBIT-P2 TRUE COPY OF THE NOTIFICATION NO. GS31120/2019 DATED 16TH JULY 2019 ISSUED FROM THE GOVERNOR'S SECRETARIAT. EXHIBIT-P3 TRUE COPY OF THE RECOMMENDATION/NOTE MADE BY THE SEARCH COMMITTEE TO THE CHANCELLOR, BEARING NO. B2/100/2019/H.EDN DATED 19TH MAY 2020 ISSUED BY THE CHIEF SECRETARY, WITH ENCLOSURES.** **EXHIBIT-P4 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER/NOTIFICATION NO. GS3-1120/2019(5) DATED 11TH JULY 2020 ISSUED FROM THE GOVERNOR'S SECRETARIAT.** ## **RESPONDENTS EXHIBITS** **EXHIBIT. R1(A) TRUE COPY OF THE NOTIFICATION DATED 03.02.2020 ISSUED BY THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARTY TO THE CHANCELLOR**