The Latest Twist in Tamil Nadu's Vice-Chancellor Appointment Saga
In a bold assertion before the Madras High Court, the Tamil Nadu Higher Education Department has declared that University Grants Commission (UGC) Regulations of 2018 do not govern the appointment of vice-chancellors (VCs), positioning VCs as university officers rather than teaching staff. This stance comes amid a protracted legal and political tussle between the state government, the Governor acting as Chancellor, and central regulatory bodies, highlighting tensions over control of higher education governance in one of India's most educationally vibrant states.
The department, represented by senior counsel P. Wilson, argued in a counter-affidavit to a public interest litigation (PIL) that shifting appointment powers from the Chancellor (Governor R.N. Ravi) to the state government aligns with constitutional provisions under Entry 32 of List II, granting states exclusive legislative competence over university incorporation, regulation, and administration. The first bench of Chief Justice Sushrut Arvind Dharmadhikari and Justice G. Arul Murugan took the counter on record and adjourned the matter to April 9, 2026, for further hearings.
Historical Context: From Governor's Dominion to State Empowerment
The roots of this dispute trace back to longstanding frictions between elected state governments and Governors, particularly in Tamil Nadu where the Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam (DMK)-led administration under Chief Minister M.K. Stalin seeks greater autonomy in university administration. Traditionally, the Governor, as Chancellor, appointed VCs based on recommendations from search-cum-selection committees. However, between 2023 and 2025, the Tamil Nadu Assembly passed amendments to acts governing 10 state universities, explicitly vesting VC appointment powers in the state government to bypass perceived gubernatorial delays and interferences.
These bills faced resistance: Governor R.N. Ravi withheld assent, referring them to the President, prompting Supreme Court intervention. In April 2025, the apex court deemed the bills assented and criticized the Governor's delays as unconstitutional, allowing Tamil Nadu to notify the acts without formal gubernatorial approval—a historic first. Yet, the battle persisted over procedural compliance with UGC norms.
Unpacking UGC Regulations 2018: The Binding Framework
The University Grants Commission (UGC), established under the UGC Act 1956, sets minimum standards for higher education. Its 2018 Regulations—formally the UGC (Minimum Qualifications for Appointment of Teachers and other Academic Staff in Universities and Colleges and Measures for the Maintenance of Standards in Higher Education) Regulations, 2018—carry statutory force and override conflicting state laws per Supreme Court precedents.
Regulation 7.3 specifically mandates a search-cum-selection committee for VC appointments comprising:
- The Vice-Chancellor of a university nominated by the Chancellor.
- A nominee of the Chairman, UGC.
- A nominee of the State Government.
The committee recommends a panel of three to five names, from which the Chancellor selects and appoints the VC for a five-year term. The UGC nominee ensures national standards, merit, and transparency, preventing politicization. Tamil Nadu's committees, however, lack this UGC representative, prompting accusations of illegality.
Tamil Nadu's Counter-Arguments: VCs as Officers, Not Teachers
Defending the amendments, Higher Education Secretary P. Shankar emphasized in the counter-affidavit that VCs are 'officers' of the university, not 'teaching staff,' citing the Supreme Court's 2015 ruling in the Madurai Kamaraj University case (Kalyani Mathivanan). Thus, UGC 2018 regs, framed for teachers and academic staff, do not apply. The state asserts its legislative supremacy under the Constitution, arguing Centre's role is limited to standards, not administration—a domain funded by state resources.
"The mandates of the appointing authority of a vice-chancellor does not have any direct bearing to standards of higher education," the affidavit states, urging dismissal of the PIL with costs, labeling it politically motivated by petitioner K. Venkatachalapathy, allegedly a BJP functionary.
Read the full Times of India report for detailed quotes.
Governor's Stance and Lok Bhavan's Rebukes
Governor R.N. Ravi has consistently flagged violations, with Lok Bhavan (Raj Bhavan) issuing strongly worded letters. In February 2026, it disapproved search committees for Bharathiar University, Bharathidasan University, and Periyar University, lacking UGC nominees and defying interim HC stays and SC rulings declaring non-compliant appointments 'void ab initio.'
- December 22, 2025: State extends committees to March 21, 2026.
- January 24-27, 2026: Interviews held without UGC input.
The Governor demanded either including UGC nominees or halting proceedings until SC resolution, invoking lis pendens doctrine.
Supreme Court Rulings: Prioritizing UGC Supremacy
The apex court has repeatedly upheld UGC regs. On January 30, 2026, in Dr. S. Mohan vs. Puducherry Technological University, it ruled state deviations invalid, allowing interim VCs to continue but mandating compliant processes. February 2026 saw SC vacating HC stays on TN amendments but directing expeditious hearings, balancing state autonomy with standards.
For a deeper dive, see the Hindu coverage on Governor-state clashes.
Universities in Limbo: Vacancies and Disruptions
Over 14 state universities face VC vacancies, stalling decisions on curricula, admissions, research funding, and infrastructure. Key affected include:
| University | Status |
|---|---|
| Anna University | VC term ended Aug 2024 |
| University of Madras | Search ongoing |
| Bharathiar University | Committee extended, no UGC nominee |
| Bharathidasan University | Interviews held Jan 2026 |
| Periyar University | Similar issues |
VIT Chancellor warns of student harm, from delayed PhD approvals to accreditation lags.
Stakeholder Perspectives: Faculty, Students, and Experts
Faculty unions decry politicization, fearing DMK favoritism erodes merit. Student bodies report administrative paralysis affecting placements and exams. Experts like former UGC members advocate hybrid models blending state oversight with central safeguards. BJP leaders term state panels 'illegal,' while DMK hails autonomy push.
Broader Ramifications for India's Higher Education Landscape
This clash exemplifies federal tensions post-NEP 2020, where states demand control amid UGC's standardization push. Similar disputes in Kerala, West Bengal underscore need for clearer constitutional delineation. Impacts include delayed NIRF rankings, research grants, and foreign collaborations for TN's 500+ affiliated colleges serving 20 lakh students.
Potential Outcomes and Future Outlook
If HC sides with state, it could embolden other non-BJP states; SC reversal would reinforce UGC. Post-April 9, expect appeals. Long-term, legislative tweaks incorporating UGC nominees could resolve. For academics, monitor UGC portal for updates.
Optimistically, resolution may streamline appointments, boosting Tamil Nadu's QS rankings ascent.
Photo by Nandha Kumar on Unsplash
Actionable Advice for Aspiring VCs and Academics
- Track state notifications and court orders.
- Prepare dossiers highlighting UGC-aligned qualifications.
- Network via academicjobs.com for openings.
- Advocate for transparent processes in faculty forums.