The education department has sought “clarification” from state-aided universities regarding the “legal expenses incurred on account of the engagement of all advocates to defend the chancellor” in connection with a petition that the state government has filed challenging his authority to appoint officiating VCs without consulting the state government.
Governor C.V. Ananda Bose is the ex-officio-chancellor of state-aided universities.
A letter signed by the special commissioner of the department, which was addressed to the registrars of all state-aided universities on Monday evening, says: “The Department of Higher Education got hold of a letter bearing No…. dated 17/10/2023 issued by the Senior Special Secretary to the Hon’ble Chancellor wherein it is directed to the Vice-Chancellor (Authorised) of Calcutta University to the effect that the legal expenses incurred on account of engagement of all advocates to defend the Hon’ble Chancellor of the University before the Hon’ble Supreme Court in connection with the SLP (State of West Bengal….) and such other cases may be shared by all the Universities concerned and the Calcutta University being the Coordinating University may make transactions towards payment of such fees from time to
time.”
An official of the department said they were surprised to find that the state-aided universities were taking part in a legal battle against the state government at the behest of the chancellor with money from the state coffers.
The universities have been asked to respond within five working days of receipt
of this letter.
The clarification has to mention the amount of legal expenses that has been incurred and/or paid to different advocates so far “on behalf of Hon’ble Chancellor of the
University”.
It has to be clarified whether such expenses have been incurred with the approval of the finance committees of the respective universities and “with the prior approval of the State Government, as per the statute of the respective Universities (documentary evidence, if any, should be furnished)”.
The response from the universities must say: “Whether under the extant Acts, Rules, Statutes, Ordinances and/or Regulations of the University, incurring such expenses not covered by the Budget grant or in excess of the Budget provision is permitted at the instances of Hon’ble Chancellor of the University.”
An official of the department said they wanted the universities to clarify: “If any such remittance has been made to Calcutta University, under what provision of the Act/ Statute, such remittance has been made and whether those advocates are empanelled advocates of the Universities.”
“Whether engagement of advocates in the above-mentioned case (or in any other cases) have been made by the Hon’ble Chancellor with
prior approval of the Senate/ Syndicate/ Court/ Executive Council/ Governing Board (as the case may be) of respective Universities,” reads the
letter.
The letter says: “Be it mentioned here that all universities are state- aided universities and there are established guidelines for using public fund irrespective of whether fund is provided from the state exchequer or raised by the University from the students, donation etc.”