Supreme Court agrees to examine Tamil Nadu's plea against Madras HC stay on nine Acts on V-C appointments in universities
A Bench of Justices PS Narasimha and R. Mahadevan issued notice to the petitioner in the High Court, advocate K. Venkatachalapathy; the Union government; the University Grants Commission (UGC); the office of the Tamil Nadu Governor; and the Human Resources and Development Ministry arraigned as respondents in the special leave petition filed by the State of Tamil Nadu.
The Bench observed that a transfer petition filed by the State, to shift the case from the Madras High Court to the top court, was already pending and scheduled to be listed soon after the summer vacations in mid July.
Tagging the petition with the transfer plea, Justice Narasimha said the parties could approach the Chief Justice of India for an early hearing. The court preferred to wait for the respondents' response to a plea by the State for an interim relief of stay of the May 21 order.
Senior advocates AM Singhvi, Rakesh Dwivedi and P. Wilson appeared for Tamil Nadu.
Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, appearing for the UGC, said the Acts were completely repugnant to the UGC Regulations of 2018.
The State argued that the High Court had ordered the stay on May 21 despite the Supreme Court, in an April 8 judgment, declaring that the Bills were granted 'deemed assent' by Governor R.N. Ravi. The State government had notified the proposed laws following the judgment.
The Acts in question include The Tamil Nadu University Amendment Act, 2020; Act No.15 of 2025-The Tamil Nadu Veterinary and Animal Sciences University (Amendment) Act, 2020; Act No.16 of 2025-The Tamil Nadu Universities Laws (Amendment) Act, 2022; Act No. 17 of 2025-The Tamil Nadu Dr. Ambedkar Law University (Amendment) Act, 2022; Act No. 18 of 2025-The Tamil Nadu Dr.M.G.R. Medical University, Chennai (Amendment) Act, 2022; Act No.19 of 2025-The Tamil Nadu Agricultural University (Amendment) Act, 2022; Act No.20 of 2025-The Tamil University (Second Amendment) Act, 2022; Act No.21 of 2025-The Tamil Nadu Fisheries University (Amendment) Act, 2023; Act No.22 of 2025-The Tamil Nadu Veterinary and Animal Sciences University (Amendment) Act, 2023.
The State has argued that there was a strong presumption of constitutionality against laws passed by the legislature.
'Courts should be slow in passing interim orders in matters challenging constitutionality of provisions and against the strong presumption of constitutionality. The High Court passed an interim order directing stay of operation of provisions which take away power of appointment of Vice Chancellor from the hands of the Chancellor and vest the same in the government,' the State's petition submitted.
Pertinently, the State has also argued that the writ petition was filed in the High Court during vacations, without pleading any urgency in the matter.
The State said its appeal has raised questions of law with wide ramifications pertaining to the issue of federalism and State autonomy to establish, regulate and administer State Universities under Entry 32 List II of the Seventh Schedule of the Constitution along with the issues pertaining to judicial impropriety and discipline in keeping a hands-off approach.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Hindu
16 minutes ago
- The Hindu
Plea in Supreme Court seeks political parties to comply with POSH law
A petition filed in the Supreme Court has sought a direction to political parties to comply with the provisions of the Sexual Harassment of Women at Workplace (Prevention, Prohibition and Redressal) Act, 2013. The plea argues that political parties are covered by the ambit of the 2013 Act, therefore, bound to follow the procedures outlined in it. It said in 2024 the petitioner, Yogamaya MG, an advocate, filed a similar plea in the top court, which granted her the liberty to move the competent authority. The petitioner sent a representation to the Election Commission of India but has received no response till date, the plea added. Safe environment for women political workers Before the top court now, she sought directions to ensure a safe and inclusive work environment for women in political parties and holding political parties accountable to prevent and address sexual harassment. With Centre and political parties, including BJP and Congress added as respondents, the plea sought a direction to constitute a grievance redressal mechanism to tackle the menace of sexual harassment in line with the apex court's directions in the landmark Vishaka verdict and the 2013 Act. "This writ petition challenges the exclusion of female political workers from the ambit of protection under the Sexual Harassment of Women at Workplace (Prevention, Prohibition and Redressal) Act, 2013 (POSH Act)," the plea filed through advocate Sriram P said. Vulnerability of women grassroot workers Despite the Act's progressive intent, the plea said, women political workers particularly at the grassroots remain vulnerable to sexual exploitation during campaigns and party work, with no effective legal remedy under the existing legislative framework. "Citing studies by UN Women (2013) and the Inter-Parliamentary Union (2016), which highlight widespread psychological and sexual harassment of women in political spaces, the petition underscores the urgent need for inclusion and protection of such workers under POSH," the plea said. The petitioner argued absence of rationale or intelligible differentia to exclude women in politics from protection available to women in other professions. Political party workers fit the definition of "employees" under the Act and the petition seeks to establish a clear framework for preventing and addressing sexual harassment within political parties, the petitioner said. The plea also sought a direction to political parties to constitute an internal complaints committee to address complaints of sexual harassment in adherence of the mandate of the 2013 Act.
Mint
16 minutes ago
- Mint
House panel recommends expansion of rapid rail networks in regions beyond NCR
New Delhi: The standing committee on housing and urban affairs has said the government should introduce rapid rail transport systems (RRTS) around major cities to decongest them and curb rising pollution levels. Currently, the country's only RRTS project is underway in the National Capital Region, with plans to connect Delhi with Meerut, Alwar and Panipat through three different corridors. The panel noted that a big rise in population in Delhi and its adjoining areas resulted in problems of housing, transportation, pollution and necessitated planning of Delhi and the surrounding region leading to the development of RRTS network. The panel said that there is a need to develop similar systems for cities like Mumbai, Kolkata, Chennai, Hyderabad and Bengaluru to solve the problems of insufficient infrastructure and congestion. "Thus, modern transportation solution like the RRTS is the need of the hour so as to enable people to live in sub-urban areas adjoining these big cities while remaining connected to modern healthcare, educational, research, entertainment facilities and opportunities of trade and employment thus increasing their productivity and ensure their social and mental well being," said the panel led by Magunta Sreenivasulu Reddy, Lok Sabha member from Ongole in Andhra Pradesh. The committee suggested the ministry of housing and urban affairs (MoHUA) persuade the respective state governments to prepare detailed regional and functional plans to meet the transportation needs of these cities. "Subject to preparation of such detailed transport plan by the concerned State Government, MoHUA may consider RRTS projects based on the proposal received from the State Government, financial commitment, feasibility study and other relevant facts. A proper roadmap is required to be prepared in this direction," he said. The projected cost of the Delhi-Meerut corridor of RRTS is ₹ 30,274 crore. RRTS services commenced in 2023 when a 17-km stretch was inaugurated. Another 17-km stretch from Duhai to Modinagar North in Uttar Pradesh was inaugurated in 2024. Regarding the progress of the Delhi-Meerut Corridor, the ministry informed the panel in November 2024 that the physical and financial progress is around 80% and 75% respectively. NCRTC informed that the Delhi-Gurugram-SNB corridor has not been sanctioned and some fine tuning of the DPR is being done. Further, the approval on the DPR and financial commitment towards the Delhi-Panipat RRTS corridor is pending from Government of the National Capital Territory of Delhi (GNCTD). Observing that the DPR of all the three corridors were finalized, the project has taken off only in respect of Delhi-Meerut corridor, the panel said that on the remaining two priority corridors, very little progress could be made. The committee noted that although urban planning is a state subject, the role of central government cannot be confined only to providing financial assistance to state governments. "Policy decision on regional planning ought to be taken at the Centre level who have an important mandate of urban transport planning and therefore impetus from the ministry for such initiative is needed. With regard to expansion of RRTS network in various cities, the Committee were informed that interventions like RRTS are suitable in cities having strong metro network providing connectivity to various places in the heart of the city," said the report. Noting that the mandate of National Capital Region Transport Corporation (NCRTC) is to undertake overall development of commuter rail, related roads, bus services to improve connectivity in NCR region only, the committee said that there is a need to leverage the capacity and expertise of NRCTC in other parts of the country for catering to the regional transportation requirement in particular and other appropriate transport solution in general. "The committee, therefore recommend that through appropriate legislative instrument, the mandate of NCRTC be extended in regions other than NCR for creation of comprehensive integrated multi-modal suburban commuter transportation system," it said.
Hindustan Times
23 minutes ago
- Hindustan Times
Hearing over Budaun temple-mosque row deferred
Budaun, The hearing in the Neelkanth Mahadev v. Shamsi Jama Masjid case in a local court was on Thursday deferred to August 30 owing to the judge's absence. Hearing over Budaun temple-mosque row deferred The case file was transferred to the fast track court as civil judge Suman Tiwari went on maternity leave. The court previously reserved its order after hearing arguments from Anwar Alam, counsel for the Shamsi Jama Masjid Management Committee. Alam argued according to Supreme Court directions, subordinate courts were not authorised to hear such religious structure disputes, and the case should be dismissed. The temple's legal team, led by advocate Ved Prakash Sahu, said the hearing on August 30 would determine whether the case can proceed in the civil court or not. The legal battle has seen multiple adjournments since February, mainly due to absent counsel, court vacations, and judge transfers. On May 28, the judge reviewed the case file and instructed both parties to present their arguments on July 5. However, the Masjid committee sought an adjournment as their lawyer, Asrar Ahmad, was on Haj pilgrimage. The judge then fixed July 5 for regular hearings to commence, and both parties were told to be present with full preparations. On July 5, advocate Alam reiterated under the Places of Worship Act, 1991, and related Supreme Court rulings, the subordinate judiciary lacked jurisdiction to hear such cases. He submitted relevant documents, including a Supreme Court order, saying no court could pass orders on matters falling under the 1991 Act. In response, temple counsel Vivek Kumar Render contended that the Supreme Court orders did not bar the ongoing or pre-existing suits from being heard. He maintained that the case should be heard in full. This article was generated from an automated news agency feed without modifications to text.
