Case Note & Summary
The Visvesvaraya Technological University, Belagavi, filed a writ appeal against an order of a learned Single Judge dated 27.02.2015 dismissing its writ petition as not maintainable. The writ petition had challenged a notification dated 19.12.2014 issued by the Chancellor of Universities in Karnataka, appointing a retired High Court Judge as a one-man fact-finding committee to inquire into allegations of irregularities in the recruitment for 168 teaching posts, awarding of civil works, and purchases in the University. The University contended that neither Section 11 nor any other provision of the Visvesvaraya Technological University Act, 1994 conferred power on the Chancellor to appoint such a committee, and that the only power was under Section 9, which allows the State Government to call for an explanation. The Division Bench, comprising B.S. Patil and P.S. Dinesh Kumar JJ., after hearing arguments, held that the Chancellor's power under Section 11(1) & (2) is wide enough to include the appointment of a fact-finding committee. The court reasoned that the Chancellor, as the head of the University, must have the means to be informed about the affairs of the University to effectively exercise his supervisory role. Therefore, the appeal was dismissed, and the order of the Single Judge was upheld.
Headnote
A) University Law - Power of Chancellor - Appointment of Inquiry Committee - Section 11(1) & (2) Visvesvaraya Technological University Act, 1994 - The Chancellor appointed a one-man fact-finding committee to inquire into irregularities in recruitment and civil works. The University challenged the notification, contending that no such power exists under the Act. The Division Bench held that the Chancellor's power under Section 11(1) & (2) is wide enough to include the appointment of such a committee, as it is necessary for the Chancellor to be informed about the affairs of the University to exercise his supervisory role. The appeal was dismissed, upholding the Single Judge's order that the writ petition was not maintainable. (Paras 1-3)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the Chancellor has the power under Section 11(1) & (2) of the Visvesvaraya Technological University Act, 1994 to appoint a one-man fact-finding committee to inquire into allegations of irregularities in the University.
Final Decision
The writ appeal is dismissed. The order of the learned Single Judge dated 27.02.2015 in W.P.No.60592/2014 is upheld.
Law Points
- Interpretation of statutes
- Power of Chancellor
- Maintainability of writ petition
- Section 11 Visvesvaraya Technological University Act
- 1994
- Section 9 Visvesvaraya Technological University Act
Case Details
2015 LawText (KAR) (04) 130
B.S.Patil, P.S.Dinesh Kumar
Sri Nanjunda Reddy, Sr. Counsel for Sri K.Anandkumar, Adv. (for appellant), Sri M.B.Naragund, Sr. Counsel for Sri Mahesh Wadeyar, Adv. (for respondent)
The Registrar, Visvesvarayya Technological University, Jnan Sangama, Belagavi – 590 018.
The Chancellor, Visvesvaraya Technological University, Raj Bhavan, Bengaluru – 560 001, Rep. by Under Secretary to Governor (University).
Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more)
Subscribe Now
Nature of Litigation
Writ appeal against dismissal of writ petition challenging Chancellor's notification appointing one-man fact-finding committee.
Remedy Sought
Appellant (University) sought to set aside the Single Judge's order and allow the writ petition.
Filing Reason
University challenged the notification dated 19.12.2014 issued by the Chancellor appointing a retired Judge as a one-man fact-finding committee to inquire into irregularities.
Previous Decisions
Learned Single Judge dismissed the writ petition as not maintainable on 27.02.2015.
Issues
Whether the Chancellor has power under Section 11(1) & (2) of the Visvesvaraya Technological University Act, 1994 to appoint a one-man fact-finding committee.
Submissions/Arguments
Appellant (University) argued that neither Section 11 nor any other provision confers power on the Chancellor to appoint such a committee; only Section 9 allows State Government to call for explanation.
Respondent (Chancellor) argued that Section 11(1) & (2) confers wide powers on the Chancellor to appoint such a committee.
Ratio Decidendi
The Chancellor's power under Section 11(1) & (2) of the Visvesvaraya Technological University Act, 1994 is wide enough to include the appointment of a fact-finding committee to inquire into allegations of irregularities, as it is necessary for the Chancellor to be informed about the affairs of the University to exercise his supervisory role.
Judgment Excerpts
The main contention of the writ petitioner-University was, that neither Section 11 nor any other provision in the Act conferred any power on the Chancellor to appoint such a committee and that the only power as provided under the Act is under Section 9, whereunder the State Government may call upon the University to offer its explanation with regard to any such matter and only if the explanation is found to be unsatisfactory, then...
Procedural History
The University filed W.P.No.60592/2014 challenging the Chancellor's notification dated 19.12.2014. The learned Single Judge dismissed the writ petition as not maintainable on 27.02.2015. The University then filed this writ appeal under Section 4 of the Karnataka High Court Act, 1961.
Acts & Sections
- Visvesvaraya Technological University Act, 1994: Section 11(1), Section 11(2), Section 9
- Karnataka High Court Act, 1961: Section 4
