Updated on

: 

05 Jul 2025, 4:17 am

NEW DELHI: The Supreme Court on Friday issued notice after hearing an appeal filed by the Tamil Nadu government challenging a May 21 Madras High Court order that stayed the operation of nine state laws concerning the appointment of vice-chancellors (V-C) in public universities.

A two-judge bench, comprising justices PS Narasimha and R Mahadevan, issued the notice to the union government, office of the Tamil Nadu Governor and the University Grants Commission (UGC). The bench, though refused to stay the high court order, however, agreed to examine the issue after responses are filed when the court reopens after summer vacation on July 14.

The apex court also tagged the matter with a transfer petition filed earlier — and pending before the SC — by the state seeking to shift the underlying case out of the high court. During the hearing, the court hinted that the transfer plea was likely to be listed after the summer recess and observed that the parties were free to move the Chief Justice of India for an expedited hearing.

On May 21, the Madras HC’s two-judge bench of justices GR Swaminathan and V Lakshmi Narayanan stayed the amendments passed by the Tamil Nadu government to make the state the appointing authority for V-Cs of various state-run universities.

The high court granted the stay after hearing a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) petition filed by advocate K Venkatachalapathy, a BJP functionary from Tirunelveli, seeking to declare all the amendment Acts null and void. Challenging this order, the TN government moved the top court.

Appearing for Tamil Nadu, senior advocate Dr Abhishek Manu Singhvi argued that the stay was granted despite the Supreme Court’s April 8 ruling that the bills in question had received deemed assent from Governor RN Ravi under Article 200 of the Constitution. Following the ruling, the nine Acts were formally notified by the state.

“The HC ought not to have stayed duly enacted laws, particularly in the absence of any pleaded urgency. These laws had received the governor’s deemed assent through the apex court’s April 8 verdict,” Singhvi pleaded.

Opposing the state government’s plea, solicitor general Tushar Mehta contended that the state laws were inconsistent with the University Grants Commission (UGC) Regulations, 2018, and were therefore invalid for repugnancy with central law. Eventually, the top court said it would hear the state’s challenge to the stay, which came despite its April 8 ruling granting deemed assent to the bills by the governor.