Governor has powers to appoint Vice-Chancellors to State universities, says C.P. Radhakrishnan
The Governors who had been guaranteed with certain powers as per the Indian Constitution and the Supreme Court ruling had powers to appoint Vice-Chancellors to State universities, Governor of Maharashtra C.P. Radhakrishnan said.
During an informal chat with reporters here on Friday, Mr. Radhakrishnan, after garlanding the statue of martyr Azhagumuthu Kone in Palayamkottai, said the Constitution had guaranteed certain powers to the Governor and the Chief Minister. The Governor, the first citizen of the State, should be given the due respect for the position he was occupying.
While the Chief Minister had been given a lot of rights, the Governor had also been bestowed with a some powers by the Constitution. If the Chief Minister exercised his powers rightly, the State would stand to benefit a lot. The Chief Ministers should not intrude into the few powers of the Governors and try to snatch them away, he said.
Mr. Radhakrishnan said the Governor had the powers to appoint the Vice-Chancellors of the State universities as per the Supreme Court verdict in a case represented by the Government of Kerala. Since the Tamil Nadu Government was attempting to violate this ruling, the Governor was trying to prevent it.
On Chief Minister M.K. Stalin's recent observation that the youth should not follow 'Godse's path', he said no one should support violence and extremism. 'If that is the point [of the Chief Minister], why did he hug the Rajiv Gandhi assassination case convict?,' he asked.
After participating in the consecration of Sri Durgai Amman Temple at Nadukkallur near here, Mr. Radhakrishnan inaugurated two classrooms built at a cost of ₹50 lakh in Manonmaniam Sundaranar University with Tirunelveli MLA Nainar Nagenthiran's constituency development fund.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Indian Express
23 minutes ago
- Indian Express
Advocate ‘warns of' taking HC judges to Supreme Court, issued contempt notice
The Punjab and Haryana High Court has issued contempt notice against an advocate, Ravneet Kaur, form making 'scandalous remarks' and 'per se contemptuous' allegations against the sitting high court judges and a trial court judge in her application seeking early hearing her pending case. Justice Harpreet Singh Brar, while dictating the order in open court, took a stern view of the language used in Ravneet Kaur's plea, and held that it not only cast aspersions on the integrity of the judicial system but also attempted to browbeat the judges entrusted with the adjudication of her matter. 'The reckless allegations made by the petitioner were intended to bring disrepute to the justice administration system. The act of the petitioner is an attempt at intimidating the adjudicatory authority which prima facie amounts to interference in the judicial process,' the judge observed while issuing a notice under the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 to the petitioner advocate. Ravneet Kaur, who argued her case in person, had moved an application seeking advancement of the hearing in her main petition that is listed for October 31. In her plea, she claimed she was being harassed by the deliberate delay in her matter and warned that if it was not taken up 'at the earliest date' she would be 'left with only option to implead Justice Sh. Sandeep Moudgill, Justice Sh. Harpreet Singh Brar and Sh. Baljinder Singh ASJ (Additional Sessions Judge) as party to file SLP (Special Leave Petition) before Hon'ble Supreme Court… because deliberately and intentionally justice has been denied… delaying the present applications and main petition just to cause harassment… to put the petitioner under pressure to withdraw the present complaints against IPS Gurpreet Singh Bhullar'. The court reproduced the statement in full in its order and held that such 'scandalous remarks attacking the integrity of the justice dispensation mechanism' could not be justified. 'Not only has she failed to indicate how she has been intentionally victimized in the matter at hand, she has also made scandalous remarks attacking the integrity of the justice dispensation mechanism… the pleadings of the petitioner are per se contemptuous,' Justice Brar said. The judge noted that Ravneet Kaur, 'not a layperson but a qualified Advocate', could not claim her 'unceremonious behaviour stemmed out of lack of knowledge.' Citing a Constitution Bench ruling of the Supreme Court in M.Y. Shareef vs Judges of the High Court of Nagpur (1955 SCR 757), he reiterated that 'counsel who sign applications or pleadings containing matter scandalising the Court… are themselves guilty of contempt of Court… his duty is to advise his client for refraining from making allegations of this nature in such applications.' The court also traced the listing history of the main case. It was consistently heard since May 29, 2024, before another bench, which later recused on May 26, 2025. The matter then came before Justice Brar on May 29, when it was adjourned at the petitioner's request. It was heard by the Vacation Bench on June 6 and June 18 and was again listed on July 14 but could not be taken up because of a 'heavy cause list of 191 cases inclusive of matters listed specially under the Mediation of Nation Drive.' On July 22, when around 245 cases were listed, Ravneet Kaur pressed for an early hearing, but the bench found 'no justifiable reasons' to grant her prayer. The court even offered her the assistance of the High Court Legal Aid Services, which she declined. Issuing the contempt notice, the bench said the allegations amounted to 'an unwarranted and unjustified challenge to the authority of the courts' that 'undermines the dignity of the rule of law' and 'have the potential of shaking the very edifice of the judicial system which would inevitably shake the faith of the public in the institution.' While refusing to advance the hearing to an earlier date, the court, 'in the interest of justice', listed the main petition for August 29.
NDTV
38 minutes ago
- NDTV
"Mistake...": Maharashtra Goes To Top Court Against Train Blasts Acquittals
The Maharashtra government has filed an appeal in the Supreme Court challenging yesterday's Bombay High Court's decision to acquit 12 persons who were accused in the 2006 Mumbai train blasts. The plea was mentioned on Tuesday before a bench led by Chief Justice of India (CJI) BR Gavai by Solicitor General of India (SGI) Tushar Mehta, who requested that the plea be taken up urgently by the top court. The Court listed the matter for hearing on Thursday. Nineteen years after seven train blasts that killed more than 180 persons, the high court on Monday acquitted all the 12 accused, saying the prosecution utterly failed to prove the case and it was "hard to believe the accused committed the crime". The Maharashtra Anti-Terrorism Squad (ATS), said the high court, failed to prove the offences beyond a reasonable doubt. The high court set aside a September 2015 judgment of the Maharashtra Control of Organised Crimes Act (MCOCA) court that had imposed the death penalty on 5 of the 12 accused persons and had sentenced the remaining 7 to life. In its damning indictment of the prosecution's case, the high court declared all confessional statements of the accused as inadmissible and suggested "copying". The Maharashtra government argued in its petition that the high court has recorded a "very peculiar observation in disbelieving the confession" of the fifth accused. The government has called it a mistake to not trust the important evidence on the recovery of RDX and detonator. "The High Court has disbelieved the recovery of 500 gms of RDX from Accused No 1on a hyper technical ground that the RDX which was seized was not sealed with a lac seal. It is worth noting that it was not sealed with Lac because RDX is a flammable high court has erred in disbelieving the recovery of RDX," said the government in its petition. Investigators said the bombs, made of RDX and ammonium nitrate, were placed inside pressure cookers and concealed in bags. The attacks were attributed to Pakistan-backed Islamic militants. The High Court, argued the state government, has committed a grave error in not accepting the arguments advanced by the trial court for sentencing the accused. "It has erred in acquitting the accused of all the charges including the UAPA," it said. The Anti-Terrorism Squad (ATS) filed charges under the Maharashtra Control of Organised Crime Act (MCOCA) and the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act (UAPA). The prosecution relied heavily on confessions, alleged recoveries, and circumstantial evidence - none of which stood up under the high court's scrutiny. "It is necessary to see that the accused were continuously engaged in activities prohibited by law, which are cognizable offences punishable with imprisonment for 3 years or more and in respect of which more than one charge sheet has to be filed in the competent court within the preceding period of 10 years and which have been tried by the competent court cognizance should have been taken," it said. Former Mumbai police commissioner A N Roy today expressed shock over the high court's acquittal of all 12 accused in the case, saying the probe into the case was conducted by the Maharashtra Anti-Terrorism Squad (ATS) in a professional manner where evidence was collected "honestly and truthfully". On the evening of July 11, 2006, bomb blasts took place at seven different places in the Mumbai local trains within just 11 minutes. In this incident, 189 people died, while more than 827 passengers were injured. The bombs were placed in first-class compartments of trains from Churchgate. They exploded near the stations of Matunga Road, Mahim Junction, Bandra, Khar, Jogeshwari, Bhayandar, and Borivali. A trial court in 2015 convicted 12 people in the blasts' case.
Time of India
an hour ago
- Time of India
Breaking News Live July 23: Leaders of ex-Pak PM Imran Khan's PTI handed 10-year jail term in May 9 riot cases
00:57 (IST) Jul 23 The Supreme Court will hear on Thursday an appeal filed by Maharashtra govt challenging the Bombay high court judgment acquitting all 12 accused, five of whom were sentenced to death by the trial court, in the July 11, 2006 Mumbai train blasts that left 187 dead and 824 injured. Solicitor general Tushar Mehta told a bench led by CJI B R Gavai that the state had filed an appeal against the verdict and said, 'It has serious ramifications. Can it be listed for hearing on Wednesday?' CJI Gavai said he learnt from news reports that 8 accused have already been released from prison. The SG said that was true, but the petition required urgent hearing. Finding additional SG Rajkumar Bhaskar Thakare alongside the SG, the CJI said, 'It was Thakare who had argued the case before the HC. We will list the petition for hearing the day after tomorrow.' The govt in its appeal said the HC misdirected itself into trivialities and misread cogent evidence, leading to failure of justice. It said confessions of the accused persons, admissible under MCOCA, were discarded by HC on technicalities even when they formed a chain of events and outlined the conspiracy to launch the sinister attack on Mumbai suburban trains, which were full of people returning from offices, and cause maximum loss of lives.
