HP High Court puts Governor’s HPU order on hold, backs Pro-VC

HP High Court puts Governor’s HPU order on hold, backs Pro-VC

SHIMLA, Oct 11,

The Himachal Pradesh High Court has kept in abeyance an order issued by the Governor, in his capacity as Chancellor of Himachal Pradesh University (HPU), assigning the Vice-Chancellor’s duties to two university officials during the Vice-Chancellor’s foreign tour, observing that the arrangement could not have been made under the relevant provisions of the Himachal Pradesh University Act, 1970.

Justice Sandeep Sharma, in an order dated October 9 in Prof. Rajinder Verma v. Himachal Pradesh University (CWP No. 18073 of 2026), directed that the Chancellor’s office order dated October 1, 2026, shall remain in abeyance until the next date of hearing.

The dispute arose after the Chancellor assigned the Vice-Chancellor’s duties from October 2 to October 12 to Professor B.K. Shivram, Dean of Studies, and Jyoti Rana, HPAS, Registrar of the university, during the Vice-Chancellor’s absence on a foreign tour.

The petitioner, Prof. Rajinder Verma, contended that as the serving Pro Vice-Chancellor, he was entitled to discharge the Vice-Chancellor’s duties during the latter’s temporary absence under Section 12-B of the Act.

Recording its findings, the High Court observed: “which, in terms of S.12D(2) of the Act could not have been done.”

The court noted that Verma had been appointed Pro Vice-Chancellor for three years through an office order dated June 3, 2023, and assumed charge on June 7, 2023. Although his normal tenure had ended on June 6, 2026, no successor had been appointed.

Also read Three years on, HPU finally gets a full-time Vice-Chancellor

Referring to Section 12-D(2), the court noted that the provision allows a Pro Vice-Chancellor to continue in office until a successor is appointed and assumes charge. On this basis, the court held that the petitioner continued to hold the office of Pro Vice-Chancellor.

The order further noted that, despite his continuation in office, the university authorities had not been adhering to earlier notifications requiring files and matters seeking the Vice-Chancellor’s orders or approval to be routed through the Pro Vice-Chancellor. It also recorded that the petitioner was not being invited to meetings of various statutory bodies and authorities of the university.

While granting the university two weeks to file its reply, the court directed that “the petitioner shall keep on performing duties of Pro Vice-Chancellor, as he was performing prior to his completing normal tenure.”

The court, however, clarified that its order would not prevent the competent authority from initiating the process for appointment of a Pro Vice-Chancellor in accordance with the provisions of the University Act.

The matter has been listed for further hearing on November 4, 2026.

The order provides interim relief to Prof. Verma. The High Court has not yet finally adjudicated the petition, and the university has been given an opportunity to respond.

About the Author

himachalscape

Administrator

Visit Website View All Posts