HC issues notice on plea challenging Punjabi University’s VC appointment

The bench of justice Suvir Sehgal sought responses from the state government, the university and the Centre, and posted the matter for hearing on May 26. Singh was appointed vice-chancellor in May 2025

The Punjab and Haryana high court on Friday sought a response on a petition challenging the appointment of Jagdeep Singh as vice-chancellor of Punjabi University, Patiala.

The petition was filed by Pushpinder Singh Gill, a professor and an applicant for the post. (HT File)

The bench of justice Suvir Sehgal sought responses from the state government, the university and the Centre, and posted the matter for hearing on May 26. Singh was appointed vice-chancellor in May 2025.

The petition was filed by Pushpinder Singh Gill, a professor and an applicant for the post. The plea alleges that the selection process was “completely flawed” and contrary to the statutory mandate. It further claims that the appointment amounted to a colourable exercise of powers by the official respondents and an attempt to sideline merit.

Besides questioning the procedure, the petitioner has also challenged Singh’s eligibility. The plea contends that the appointment reflects a pattern within the Punjab higher education department of appointing “ineligible individuals” as vice-chancellor of Punjabi University. It points out that two previous VC appointments are already under judicial scrutiny before the court.

The petition alleges that the appointment violates regulation 7.3 of the University Grants Commission (UGC), which requires a vice-chancellor to be a “distinguished academician” with at least 10 years’ experience as a professor in a university or 10 years’ experience in a reputed research or academic and administrative organisation, along with demonstrated academic leadership.

However, Singh is “ineligible” for appointment.

“..he does not have any real involvement in academic leadership or research. His roles at the Central University of Punjab as controller of examinations and registrar are both non-teaching positions. Similarly, his position as registrar at IISER Mohali is also a non-teaching role. Therefore, respondent number 4 (Singh) cannot be described as a “distinguished academician”. Nor does he fulfill the minimum 10 years of experience as professor in an university or 10 years’ experience in reputed research and/or academic and administrative organisation with proof of having demonstrated academy leadership,” the plea claimed, adding that Singh’s dissociation from academic activities can be seen from the fact that during his entire career of 32 years, he did not supervise even a single PhD candidate, and hence, he does not have the basic experience for consideration for the post of VC.