The High Court
Case Details
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK W.P.(C) No. 15853 of 2025 Prabir Kumar Das …. Petitioner In Person State of Odisha and others …. Opposite Parties -versus- Mr. Pitambar Acharya, Advocate General along with Mr. S. Das, Additional Government Advocate for State Mr. Dayananda Mohapatra, Senior Advocate (OP No.3) CORAM: HON’BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE AND HON’BLE MR JUSTICE MANASH RANJAN PATHAK Order No.
Decision
ORDER 23.07.2025 03. 1. The petitioner, being a public spirited person, raised an important issue with regard to the appointment of an officiating Vice-Chancellor of Utkal University in gross violation of Section 6(10) of the Odisha Universities Act, 1989 (in short, 'the Act'). 2. The record would reveal that the Vice-Chancellor subsequently demitted the office upon attaining superannuation and the head of the department of the said University was directed to act as the Vice-Chancellor as a stopgap measure under the aforesaid provision. Page 1 of 6 3. According to the petitioner, such order issued by the Chancellor directly offends the core spirit of Section 6(10) of the Act which postulates that as a temporary measure where the regular appointment of the Vice-Chancellor does not appear to be feasible, any Vice-Chancellor of the neighbouring public university of the State can act as the Vice-Chancellor of the said university. 4. The attention was drawn to the aforesaid provision at the time of moving the instant PIL and an attention of the Court was also drawn by Mr. Pitambar Acharya, learned Advocate General that the said Section 6(10) of the State Act has undergone a significant change by virtue of an amendment brought in 2024, wherein the word "neighbouring" was deleted. It would be apposite and profitable to quote both the unamended and amended Section 6(10) of the Act by virtue of the Odisha Universities (Amendment) Act, 2024. "The Odisha Universities Act, 1989 6(10). In case the office of the Vice-Chancellor falls vacant due to any other reason, the vacancy shall be filled in the manner specified in Sub-section (1). Provided that where it is not reasonably practicable to fill up the vacancy in the manner as aforesaid immediately after it occurs, the Page 2 of 6 Chancellor may appoint any of the Vice- Chancellor of a neighbouring Public University of the State as Vice-Chancellor for a period not exceeding one year or till joining of a regular Vice-Chancellor, whichever is earlier, and the Vice-Chancellor so appointed shall exercise the powers and perform the functions of the Vice- Chancellor and shall be entitled to such allowance as determined by the Chancellor. The Odisha Universities (Amendment) Act, 2024 6(g) In the proviso to sub-section (10), for the words, "Chancellor may appoint any of the Vice-Chancellor of a neighbouring", the words "the Chancellor in consultation with the State Government may appoint any of the Vice-Chancellor of any" shall be substituted." 5. From a conjoint reading of the unamended and the amended Section 6(10) of the Act, even after deleting the word "neighbouring", the purport and the tenet of this section has not received any radical changes. It is noticed that the said amendment Act of 2024 was duly notified by order dated 17th April, 2025 in the Odisha Gazette Extraordinary and we can reasonably presume that the said amended provision becomes operative from the date of such notification. It admits no ambiguity in our mind from the reading of Page 3 of 6 the said provision that as an interim measure, a Vice-Chancellor of a public university in the State may be entrusted to officiate as the Vice-Chancellor of the university where the vacancy has fallen and discharge the duties and the functions assigned to such post. 6. Undeniably, by virtue of a notification dated 27th May, 2025 issued by the Principal Secretary to the Chancellor communicating the decision of the Hon’ble Chancellor that the Professor in Biotechnology of the said university is appointed as in-charge Vice- Chancellor of Utkal University with immediate effect until the regular Vice Chancellor is appointed in the said university. Obviously, the said notification is issued after the amendment having brought in Section 6(10) of the Act and, therefore, it can be reasonably inferred that instead of the Vice-Chancellor of the neighbouring public university in the State, any Vice-Chancellor of the public university within the State may act as the Vice-Chancellor of Utkal University. 7. Since the Professor in Biotechnology of the said university does not fulfill such statutory conditions, such notification cannot withstand on the parameter of the aforesaid provision. Mr. Acharya, learned Advocate General fairly submits that after being made aware Page 4 of 6 of the provisions of the law, the matter was moved before the Government and the order of appointment in favour of the Professor of Biotechnology has been cancelled and the same is duly notified vide No.GOV-HE-UI-0010-2020/8656/SG(HE) dated 22nd July, 2025 to operate with immediate effect. 8. The pivotal issue involved in the instant PIL relates to the appointment of the said Professor in Biotechnology in blatant violation of the provisions contained under Section 6(10) of the Act and the same appears to have been redressed as such appointment has been cancelled by the Hon’ble Chancellor on 22nd July, 2025. 9. At this stage, Mr. Acharya, learned Advocate General submits that in order to clear any confusion or to streamline the system for appointing the Vice-Chancellor, a decision has been taken in the Cabinet and in the near future, there would be amendment to the said provision. We do not make any observation thereupon as it is within the legislative competence of the State to take a decision in this regard. 10. Since the core issue involved in the instant PIL has been redressed and/or taken care of by the Government, we do not find any justification in keeping the instant writ petition pending. Page 5 of 6 However, we hastened to add that it is expected from the Government or its officials to act strictly within the circumference of the statutory provision as the transgression from the peripheral thereof entails such decision susceptible to be interfered with in a judicial review. 11. In the event, any amendment is brought, we expect that a timely steps shall be taken or so long such amendment is not brought, the Government shall take steps so that the university should not remain without the Vice-Chancellor. It is open to the Government to take a conscious decision in this regard. 12. The writ petition is accordingly disposed of. Judge (Harish Tandon) Chief Justice (M.R. Pathak) S. Behera Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed Signed by: SUMANTA BEHERA Designation: Senior Stenographer Reason: Authentication Location: High Court of Orissa, Cuttack Date: 04-Aug-2025 18:27:14 Page 6 of 6