THE JHARKHAND STORY NETWORK
New Delhi, January 31: The Supreme Court of India has ruled that University Vice-Chancellor appointments must strictly follow the University Grants Commission (UGC) Regulations, 2018, and any state law prescribing a different search-cum-selection committee structure will be invalid.
In a judgment delivered on January 30, the Court held that UGC norms on VC selection fall under higher education standards — a subject exclusively within Parliament’s domain under the Union List — and therefore override conflicting state legislation.
State Law Cannot Override UGC Norms
A bench of Justices Vikram Nath and Sandeep Mehta upheld a Madras High Court judgment that struck down Section 14(5) of the Puducherry Technological University Act, 2019, which prescribed a search committee composition different from UGC Regulations.
The Supreme Court said that if the search-cum-selection committee is constituted contrary to UGC Regulations, the entire VC appointment process becomes illegal.
ALSO READ: XLRI releases XAT 2026 GD-PI cutoffs for BM and HRM programmes
UGC Nominee Mandatory in VC Search Panel
Under UGC Regulations 2018, the VC search committee must include a nominee of the UGC Chairman and members should not be connected with the concerned university. The committee formed under the Puducherry law did not meet these requirements.
The Court declared the conflicting state provision ultra vires UGC Regulations framed under a central law traceable to Entry 66 of the Union List.
Article 254 Repugnancy Test Not Applicable
The Court clarified that the constitutional repugnancy test under Article 254 applies only when both central and state laws fall under the Concurrent List. Since UGC standards fall exclusively under the Union List, the question of presidential assent to cure inconsistency does not arise.
Relief Granted to Sitting VC
While holding the selection process invalid, the Court allowed the current Vice-Chancellor, Dr S. Mohan, to continue till the end of his tenure in December 2026 or until a fresh appointment is made under UGC norms, whichever is earlier.
Invoking Article 142, the Court said this was necessary to avoid administrative disruption and undue stigma, noting there were no allegations regarding his qualifications or integrity. He has also been allowed to participate in any fresh selection process.
The Court added that the Puducherry legislature is free to amend its university law to bring it in line with UGC Regulations.
