Petition challenging Dr YS Parmar univ. Vice-Chancellor’s extension dismissed by HP High Court
Photo used for indicative purpose only. Source internet
Shimla, Oct 10,
The Himachal Pradesh High Court has dismissed a petition challenging the extension of tenure of Dr. Rajeshwar Singh Chandel as Vice-Chancellor of Dr. Y.S. Parmar University of Horticulture and Forestry, Nauni, Hamirpur. The petition, filed by Dharam Paul Sharma, Dean at the University, had contended that the initial appointment of Dr. Chandel in May 2022 was unlawful, alleging that the Selection Committee which recommended his appointment was not constituted strictly in accordance with Section 24 of the Himachal Pradesh University of Agriculture, Horticulture and Forestry Act, 1986.
Justice Sandeep Sharma, who presided over the case, observed that while the original selection of Dr. Chandel was “bad in law” because the Director General of ICAR had been replaced by a nominee, the issue lost relevance as Dr. Chandel had already completed his full term. The court noted that the petitioner, by choosing not to challenge the initial appointment at the time, had acquiesced in the continuation of Dr. Chandel in office. The judge emphasized, “Before declaration, if any, could be made by this Court with regard to initial selection of respondent No.4 against the post of Vice-Chancellor, he had completed his normal tenure, as such, the plea that respondent No. 4 having not been selected by a legally constituted committee, is a usurper of the public post has lost its relevance.”
The petitioner had sought directions to prevent the Chancellor from granting extension to Dr. Chandel and to appoint the senior-most faculty member as interim Vice-Chancellor. However, the High Court clarified that the Chancellor acted within the powers granted under Section 24(3) of the Act, which allows the incumbent to continue until a successor is appointed. Justice Sharma stated, “Having carefully perused order dated 6.5.2025, this court is fully convinced that respondent No.4 has not been re-appointed in terms of S.24 (3) rather, he has been permitted to continue to hold office till his successor is appointed. No illegality can be said to have been committed by Chancellor while passing order dated 6.5.2025.”
The court also highlighted that the petitioner lacked the necessary locus standi to challenge the appointment through a writ of quo warranto, noting, “Neither petitioner has shown that he has a locus standi to file and maintain the present writ petition nor he has specifically prayed for setting aside appointment of respondent No.4.” It further observed that since the petitioner did not challenge the initial selection in 2022, he had effectively acquiesced to Dr. Chandel’s tenure.
Consequently, the High Court dismissed the writ petition and disposed of the associated contempt proceedings, vacating all interim directions.
About the Author
The HimachalScape Bureau comprises seasoned journalists from Himachal Pradesh with over 25 years of experience in leading media conglomerates such as The Times of India and United News of India. Known for their in-depth regional insights, the team brings credible, research-driven, and balanced reportage on Himachal’s socio-political and developmental landscape.
