Governor Arif Mohammed Khan alleged that the Minister's act of chairing Senate meeting was 'illegal" (Image Source: India Today)
In a recent development, Governor Dr Arif Mohammed Khan launched a scathing attack on Higher Education Minister R Bindu concerning her role in chairing the Kerala University Senate meeting held on February 16. Dr. Khan labelled the minister as a ‘criminal’, alleging her intrusion into the Senate hall and unauthorised chairing of the meeting in her capacity as the Pro-Chancellor of the state universities. The Governor’s strong stance against the minister hinted at the potential nullification of the resolutions allegedly passed during the contentious meeting.
The Senate meeting convened to form a Search Committee for selecting nominees for the permanent Vice-Chancellor (VC) position, and witnessed a clash between Minister Bindu and interim VC Dr. Mohanan Kunnummel. The altercation arose when the Minister proposed postponing the nomination process, a suggestion met with opposition from the VC who asserted his authority to convene the meeting.
Eleven Senate members nominated by the Governor lodged a complaint accusing Minister Bindu of disrupting the meeting and engaging in unlawful behaviour. They alleged that the Minister, acting as Pro-Chancellor, unlawfully chaired the meeting, obstructed its proceedings, and supported resolutions aimed at sabotaging the agenda. Furthermore, they cited violations of the Kerala University Act 1977 and accused the Minister of disrespecting the law and disobeying established procedures.
The complaint detailed instances of chaos and unruliness in the Senate hall, including physical intimidation and derogatory remarks directed at nominated members. The Governor, empowered to act against such violations under relevant provisions of the University Act, was urged to intervene to preserve the integrity of the institution and ensure justice.
According to the complaint, the primary agenda of the special meeting was to select the Senate’s representative tasked with recommending a candidate for the position of Vice-Chancellor. The procedure for conducting business was expected to adhere to the guidelines outlined in Chapter 1(3) of the Kerala University First Statutes, 1977. This chapter specifies that the election of a committee member under Sub Section 1 of Section 10 of the Kerala University Act, 1974, must take place during a Senate meeting specially convened for this purpose.
The notice issued to Senate members on February 5 unequivocally stated the purpose of the meeting. Consequently, they confirmed their attendance under the belief that the meeting would proceed as planned to address the aforementioned agenda. However, their expectations were shattered when they were met with scenes of utter chaos and disorder. This tumultuous atmosphere was attributed to the leadership and patronage of the Higher Education Minister. Members affiliated with the left-wing displayed behaviour deemed uncivilised and disruptive.
The Minister entered the hall before the Vice-Chancellor, taking the VC’s seat and placing her nameplate on the table, indicating her role as ‘Pro-Chancellor’. Upon the VC’s arrival and attempt to address the gathering, the Minister interrupted, asserting her authority as chairperson. This action flagrantly violated established protocols and rules. It appeared that she was being influenced by members aligned with the Left. By misusing Section 8 (2) of the Kerala University Act 1974 and exploiting the absence of the Chancellor, she unlawfully assumed the role of Pro-Chancellor. This move granted her powers she did not rightfully possess. Additionally, she facilitated the presentation of a resolution by Dr. S. Nazeeb, which aimed to disrupt the meeting’s agenda.
Chapter 5 (3), (6), and (7) of the Kerala University First Statutes, 1977 clearly outline the procedures for handling resolutions, with the VC serving as the ultimate authority. The Minister’s actions exceeded her jurisdiction, surpassing even the Chancellor’s powers. It is evident that her actions were driven by personal motives, and orchestrated with careful planning and coordination.
Additionally, concerns were raised regarding the publication of meeting minutes and press releases without the VC’s knowledge, suggesting potential breaches of protocol by university officials.
The nominated members further reported threats and harassment from Left-affiliated groups, highlighting the volatile atmosphere surrounding the Senate meeting. They emphasised the need for immediate action against those responsible for disrupting proceedings and violating the rights of nominated members.
She unlawfully assumed the role of Pro-Chancellor and permitted Left members to introduce the resolution. The Chancellor, as per Section 7(3) of the Kerala University Act, 1974, possesses the authority to address such illegal actions by the Minister. Left members directed unparliamentary remarks towards the nominated members, prompting demands for severe repercussions against them for their inappropriate conduct during the meeting.
A formal complaint has been filed against the Left members at the police station, outlining the details of their misconduct. It is alleged that the minutes of the Special Meeting, convened by the VC, were signed by the Registrar and Pro-Chancellor, and a press release signed by the Public Relations Office, both dated February 16, without the VC’s knowledge. Such actions are highly condemnable, and strict action against the Registrar and the PRO-in-charge is warranted in this regard.
The complaint lodged by the nominated members with the police outlines the following grievances:
Since their nomination on December 4, 2023, they have faced continuous threats from district leaders of SFI, DYFI, and CPM, who warned them against participating in the meeting. In response, they sought police intervention and petitioned the Kerala High Court for protection to attend the first Senate meeting scheduled for 11 a.m. on February 16. The Left members’ fear of the nominated members stemmed from their commitment to expose longstanding malpractices, mismanagement, and ethical degradation within the University. Seeking retribution, Left members resorted to intimidation tactics, even after the nominated members secured protection from the High Court.
During the meeting, LDF members engaged in obscene and derogatory behaviour, threatening retaliation against the nominated members due to their affiliation with powerful student outfits and ruling parties. When P. Sreekumar attempted to address the assembly, a Left member disrupted proceedings by shouting slogans. Thiruvananthapuram Mayor Arya Rajendran spearheaded the disruptive actions, justifying their behaviour by claiming to attend as a Senator rather than in her capacity as the City’s Mayor.
The nominated members demanded immediate action against the Left members for instigating chaos in the Senate hall. Additionally, they submitted video evidence of the objectionable incidents along with their complaint.
Amidst these allegations and counter-allegations, the integrity of the Kerala University Senate meeting stands compromised, raising significant questions about governance and accountability within the institution. As tensions escalate, the focus shifts towards the Governor’s impending decision and potential ramifications for the future of Kerala University’s leadership.
Leave a Comment