The second day of the Communist Party of India (Marxist) State committee meeting here reportedly grappled with the question of issuing an ordinance or introducing a Bill in the Assembly to curtail the Governor’s power as Chancellor of State universities.
Kerala Governor Arif Mohammed Khan and the government were fiercely at odds over the legality of the appointment of Vice Chancellors.
Mr. Khan demanded the resignation of nine Vice Chancellors after the Supreme Court annulled the APJ Abdul Kalam Technology University Vice Chancellor’s appointment. The Chancellor premised his decision on the argument that the government had followed the same process, deemed flawed by the Supreme Court, in appointing the other Vice Chancellors.
The CPI(M) viewed Mr. Khan’s action as a trespass on the jurisdictional autonomy of the universities. Moreover, by nominating Raj Bhavan selectees as Vice Chancellors, it felt the Chancellor was attempting to impose “RSS control” over higher learning centres.
An insider said the CPI(M) conclave reportedly concluded that the Assembly had created the Chancellor’s office by a statute embedded in the varsity laws. Hence, it felt the legislature was competent to curtail the Chancellor’s powers or even supplant Mr. Khan with Chief Minister Pinarayi Vijayan as the head of universities.
Some leaders reportedly pointed out that the M.M. Punchhi commission, constituted to study Centre-State relations, had questioned the role of Governors as State varsity Chancellors and vouched against according the Raj Bhavan such powers.
The CPI(M) conclave reportedly decided to counter Mr. Khan’s alleged attempt to stall the legislative process by withholding his approval for Bills passed by the Assembly indefinitely. It felt the Governor should return the Bill for the legislature’s reconsideration instead of keeping draft laws in suspended animation perennially.
The CPI(M) has reportedly adopted a two-prong strategy to oppose the Governor. It has given political sanction for the government to question Mr. Khan’s perceived refusal to sign Bills into law in the Supreme Court. The administration has authenticated an estimated ₹30 lakh budget for seeking expert legal opinion.
The party has also reportedly weighed seeking the Opposition’s support in the Assembly to pare down Mr. Khan’s powers as Chancellor via unanimous legislation.
It also reportedly debated whether university laws or University Grants Commission (UGC) norms prevailed in university administration. A clear picture of the CPI(M)‘s future moves might emerge after the State committee concludes on Sunday.
