Supreme Court Urges Governor to Appoint 12 University VCs From Panel Recommended by Former Chief Justice Lalit

A dispute over the appointment of vice-chancellors in West Bengal universities is approaching resolution as the Supreme Court has asked Governor C V Ananda Bose to select VCs for 12 state universities from the names proposed by a committee headed by former Chief Justice of India U U Lalit. The move comes amid continued friction between the Governor and Chief Minister Mamata Banerjee over the appointment process and authority.

Background: The Conflict Between Governor and State Government
For months, the state government and the Raj Bhavan have disagreed on who has the final say in appointing vice-chancellors. The Governor, acting as Chancellor of state universities, has raised objections to certain names proposed by the Chief Minister. Meanwhile, the Chief Minister’s list of candidates has sometimes not matched what the Governor approves.

In response to this deadlock, the Supreme Court in early August set up a Search-cum-Selection Committee, led by ex-CJI U U Lalit. The committee’s job was to review panels of names submitted by the government, consider the Governor’s objections, and recommend suitable candidates for the VC posts across 15 state universities.

Committee’s Recommendations and the SC’s Direction
The Lalit-led committee has submitted a list unanimously recommending candidates for 12 universities, including prestigious institutions like Calcutta University and Jadavpur University. For three other universities—North Bengal University, Maulana Abul Kalam Azad University of Technology, and Netaji Subhash Open University—the committee could not reach a single consensus, so it proposed two alternative sets of names each.

The Supreme Court has now told the Governor to consider appointing VCs from the lists provided for those 12 universities. The court instructed that he choose from the three recommended names in each panel. No immediate relief was offered regarding the three universities with split recommendations. The matter is scheduled for further hearings.

Implications for Higher Education Governance in Tier-2 Cities
Universities in smaller cities often feel the ripple effects of such disputes more strongly. Delays in appointing VCs can mean stalled academic programs, funding issues, and slower decision-making in affiliating colleges, hiring faculty or improving infrastructure. Students and faculty in Tier-2 areas depend on stable leadership for long-term planning, research grants and collaborations.

Furthermore, clarity on who holds ultimate authority—Governor or State government—matters a great deal. Administrative uncertainty can precipitate low morale among staff and delay policy implementation. It also raises broader questions about autonomy of institutions and checks and balances in higher education governance.

Challenges and Areas Still Pending
While the SC’s direction covers 12 universities, the remaining three still pose a problem because of conflicting recommendations. The Governor must decide whether to choose from either list, which may create precedents. There’s also the possibility of legal challenges or further objections.

Another concern is ensuring transparency: whether reasons for rejecting certain names were properly documented, whether objections are substantive or political, and whether the selection process remains impartial. The timing of appointments, given academic calendars, is another factor.

Conclusion
The Supreme Court’s call to appoint VCs for 12 state universities from the Lalit committee’s list is a step toward ending a prolonged governance impasse. For universities, especially in Tier-2 cities, this could bring much needed stability and clarity. But real progress will depend on how those left out of consensus are resolved, how the authorities handle objections, and whether the process becomes more transparent. Public trust in university leadership hinges on fair, timely, and accountable systems.