HC quashes appointment of Vinod Kumar Verma as Hisar vet varsity V-C
The court said the varsity’s claim that the decision (of appointing the V-C) was unanimous, is fallacious and a deliberate attempt to misread the statutory provision in a brazen attempt to justify its flagrant violation of law.
The Punjab and Haryana high court has set aside the appointment of Vinod Kumar Verma as the vice-chancellor (VC) of Lala Lajpat Rai University of Veterinary and Animal Sciences (LUVAS), Hisar.
Then head of the veterinary pharmacology and toxicology department, Verma, was appointed as V-C on January 20, 2022. He took over the very next day.
His appointment was challenged by Dr Jagveer Rawat, one of the candidates among 20 others who had applied for the post in 2022.
Rawat had sought annulment of appointment arguing that it is illegal since there was no unanimity among the varsity board of management members for appointing Verma. As per the procedure prescribed in Section 20(1) of the varsity Act, V-C is required to be appointed by the board unanimously. However, in this case one of the members did not consent to the selection, still the appointment order was issued which is unsustainable being contrary to the statutory provisions, he had argued.
As per the proceedings, Dr BN Tripathi, then deputy director general (Animal Sciences), Indian Council for Agriculture Research, New Delhi, one of the nine members of the board, had written a mail on January 21, 2022 to registrar of the varsity stating that he was muted during the meeting of January 20, in which the issue of appointment was taken up. Tripathi had appeared through videoconferencing due to prevailing Covid-19 conditions. He had also stated that he had not consented to Verma’s appointment.
On the other hand, the varsity had claimed in the court that despite being present, Tripathi did not express his opinion in any manner, neither through email nor phone, which was required to be given in the meeting itself. The dissent conveyed subsequently, vide email the next day, was of no consequence.
The bench of justice Tribhuvan Dahiya observed that the stand taken by the university is far from being “fair and reasonable”. It was incumbent upon the board to take his opinion (consent or dissent). Instead, the proceedings were concluded in “cavalier fashion” without bothering to record his opinion which is arbitrary, it recorded.
The court also noted that Tripathi was a senior veterinarian holding a responsible position in the ICAR, and was the only outside expert, as he did not belong either to the university or the government.
“Without going into the issue as to who was responsible for muting him, it remains unchallenged that his link got snapped. Resultantly, the seventh respondent (Tripathi) was not able to express his views regarding selection during the Board meeting. And he conveyed his dissent to the selection of fifth respondent the next day at 08:58 am, by sending an email..,” the bench further recorded adding that the board has jurisdiction to appoint a V-C only by unanimous choice of its members. “This makes it incumbent on the Board to seek and record views/opinion of all the members present and take consent of each one of them before appointing a person, as failure of even one of the members to concur renders the Board without jurisdiction to make the appointment,” it said adding that the appointment was not unanimous.
The bench further added that facts of the case establish that the board “deliberately gave scant regard to the mandatory provisions”. The varsity’s claim that the decision was unanimous’, is “fallacious and a deliberate attempt to misread the statutory provision in a brazen attempt to justify its flagrant violation of law” in appointing the VC, it asserted.
Now Verma has been directed to demit office forthwith by handing over charge to the seniormost professor in the university who will hold the charge temporarily till any other arrangement is made by the varsity. The university has been asked to initiate a fresh process for making new appointment.