Variations in Acts of universities pose problems

SS Chahal Ex-VC, Maharana Pratap University of Agriculture & Technology, Udaipur & AK Grover former Vice Chancellor, Panjab University, Chandigarh

APPARENT procedural lapses in finalising the names of Vice Chancellors (VCs) of two state-run universities — Punjab Agricultural University (PAU), Ludhiana, and Baba Farid University of Health Sciences (BFUHS), Faridkot — underline the need for more caution and comprehensive knowledge of the provisions of the Acts under which various universities were established. In both cases, the persons selected/appointed have faced embarrassment, even as uncertainty has hampered the functioning of the universities.

Each state university in Punjab is an autonomous higher education institution (HEI) created under its own Act notified as legislation; the Governor of the state is the Chancellor and a specific procedure has been prescribed for the appointment of the VC. Though PAU is governed by a 1970 Act of Parliament, which subsumed the PAU Act (1961), it continues to be a state university with the Governor being the Chancellor and the Honorary Chairman of its Board of Management (BoM), which selects the VC. Among the universities of Punjab, PAU and its 2005 off-shoot Guru Angad Dev Veterinary and Animal Sciences University are the only ones in which the respective BoM is enjoined to select the VC.

Three HEIs were nucleated by the Punjab Government in 1962 — Post Graduate Institute for Medical Education and Research (PGIMER), PAU and Punjabi University, Patiala. As Chandigarh became a Union Territory in 1966, the PGIMER moved into the domain of the Union Government and Parliament passed a new Act on the lines of an Act for AIIMS. The PGIMER Act (1966) empowers the Union Government to appoint its Director for a term of five years or until the appointee reaches the age of 65 years, whichever is earlier.

Punjabi University came into being on April 30, 1962, through its Act enacted by the state Legislature in 1961, which stipulated the VC’s appointment for a term of three years by the Chancellor on the advice of the state government. The VC can continue for subsequent three-year terms, and no upper age limit was prescribed. Similar provisions for the VC of Guru Nanak Dev University (Amritsar), established in 1969, were included in its own Act. The BFUHS is governed by its Act of 1998, which also stipulates the selection of the VC by the Punjab Government.

Punjab’s first university, Chandigarh-based Panjab University (PU), is governed by the PU Act (1947), which is a variant of the Indian Universities Act (1904), enacted for the then five universities of India. The Vice President of India is designated as the Chancellor of PU by the Union Home Ministry. The Chancellor has complete jurisdiction over the selection of the PU VC; one term of a VC is for three years and there is no upper age limit.

In the case of PAU, where the BoM is empowered to select the VC, the meetings of the BoM have typically been chaired by the Chief Secretary. Its Act states that if a recommendation of the BoM for the VC’s post is not unanimous, the matter would be referred to the Governor for the final decision. One term of the PAU VC is for four years. The term(s) could be extended, and no upper age limit is specified there as well.

The first two VCs of PAU, PN Thapar (1962-68) and Dr MS Randhawa (1968-76), were retired ICS officers; they had served as Secretary, Food and Agriculture, in New Delhi. The subsequent VCs of the university have all been distinguished agriculture scientists. In recent decades, Dr MS Kang (2007-11) and Dr BS Dhillon (2011-21) were persuaded by the then Chief Minister of Punjab to return to their alma mater from the US and Germany, respectively.

The post of PAU VC fell vacant on June 30, 2021. Subsequently, officiating VCs were appointed by giving additional charge to bureaucrat members in the BoM, with the approval of the Chancellor. In the meantime, the post was advertised twice. Eventually, the BoM unanimously selected Dr Satbir Singh Gosal as the 11th regular VC on August 19, 2022; however, a formal concurrence was not sought from the BoM’s Honorary Chairman-cum-Chancellor, PAU. This apparent lapse and presumed non-observance of UGC regulations led the Governor to term the appointment as illegal two months later. The Governor could have post facto endorsed the decision of the BoM, and concurrently issued an advisory to the government to conspicuously recognise the role of Honorary Chairman of the BoM.

The UGC has been enunciating regulations from time to time for the appointment of a VC by the Chancellor. It is mentioned in its 2013 regulations that the VC’s selection by the Chancellor should be through identification of a panel of 3-5 names via a public notification or nomination or a talent search process or in combination.

The variations in the Acts of different universities have persisted because no effort has been made to incorporate modifications as per provisions of the regulations notified by the UGC or the Model Act for Agricultural Universities, developed by the Indian Council of Agricultural Research (ICAR). In a recent judgement on the appointment of the VC of a technological university in Kerala, the Supreme Court reiterated the supremacy of Central Government regulations over those of the states. It is imperative to bring the PAU Act and statutes on a par with the regulations of the Central regulatory bodies.

It is also desirable to urgently end the discord over the appointment of the PAU VC and the selection of BFUHS VC through discussions and an understanding of each other’s prerogatives by the topmost offices.