Court dismisses Syndicate's challenge, emphasizes hierarchical integrity and calls for thorough investigation into alleged irregularities.
In a significant ruling, the Kerala High Court has dismissed the writ petitions filed by members of the Calicut University Syndicate challenging the decision of the Chancellor, who reversed the Syndicate's disciplinary action against an Instrumentation Engineer accused of causing financial loss to the university. The court emphasized the hierarchical structure and the limits of judicial review, reinforcing the Chancellor's role as the supreme appellate authority within the university's framework.
The dispute arose when the Calicut University Syndicate found the Instrumentation Engineer guilty of charges related to irregularities in a Local Area Network (LAN) installation project, leading to significant financial loss. The Syndicate had ordered the engineer's reversion and financial recovery. However, the Chancellor, acting as the appellate authority, overturned this decision, reinstating the engineer with full benefits. This prompted members of the Syndicate to seek judicial intervention.
Justice Ziyad Rahman A.A., presiding over the case, underscored the principle that a quasi-judicial body like the Syndicate cannot challenge decisions made by a superior authority unless there are exceptional circumstances of illegality or bias. The judgment highlighted that the Syndicate's role is to implement the Chancellor's decision, not to contest it, thus maintaining the integrity of the institutional hierarchy.
The court also addressed the issue of locus standi, determining that individual members of the Syndicate lacked the standing to file the petition as they were not personally aggrieved by the Chancellor's decision. The judgment referenced several precedents establishing that judicial review should focus on the decision-making process, not re-evaluate factual findings unless there is a manifest error.
Furthermore, the court recognized the concerns about potential misconduct in the LAN project and directed the Vigilance Department to carry out a thorough investigation to identify those responsible for the alleged financial discrepancies and ensure recovery of any losses incurred by the university.
The ruling serves as a reminder of the defined roles within academic institutions and the importance of adhering to statutory procedures, while also acknowledging the need for accountability in administrative actions.
Bottom line:-
University Administration - Syndicate of a University, being a quasi-judicial authority, lacks the competency to challenge the order of the Chancellor, who is the appellate authority, in disciplinary proceedings. Such challenges undermine institutional hierarchy and discipline unless exceptional circumstances of illegality or bias are evident.
Statutory provision(s):
Calicut University Act, 1975 Section 3, Article 226 of the Constitution, Statutes 52 and 53 of Part III of Chapter 4 of the Calicut University First Statutes, 1977.
M. B. Faisal v. State of Kerala, (Kerala) : Law Finder Doc id # 2902668
