The Supreme Court on Friday took exception to Bengal governor C.V. Ananda Bose’s latest unilateral appointments of ad hoc vice-chancellors to six universities, and said these appointees would receive the pay or perks not of a VC but those commensurate with their previous posts.

The apex court also restrained the governor, who is the chancellor of state universities, from making any more such appointments.

The bench of Justices Surya Kant and Dipankar Datta wondered why the governor and the chief minister, both constitutional authorities, could not sit across the table and settle the issue as the court had suggested during earlier hearings.

The top court had on August 21 issued notices to the governor and higher education regulator UGC on a petition from the state government challenging Bose’s unilateral appointments of ad hoc VCs without consulting it.

Later, the state’s standing counsel, Astha Sharma, moved a fresh application saying that despite the matter being sub judice, the governor had continued to appoint ad hoc VCs to state universities.

“This is not fair. The appointment orders issued by the chancellor do not even mention that these appointments would be subject to the outcome of this present litigation,” senior advocate Abhishek Manu Singhvi, representing the state, told the bench on Friday.

Justice Kant, who headed the bench, issued notices on the interim application against the latest ad hoc appointments while clarifying: “The pay and allowances of such ad hoc VCs will be in the pay and grade to which they were originally authorised and not of VCs….”

Justice Kant added: “We had suggested that you should discuss the matter. We were expecting some sort of understanding and maturity from both sides since this is a question of educational institutions. It involves the careers of lakhs of students.

“West Bengal as we know has been a hub of quality education right from the time of Santiniketan. We hope those standards and values will be observed by both sides and (they would) solve this issue amicably.”

Justice Datta asked senior advocate D. Seshadhri Naidu, appearing for Bose, how the governor could withhold his assent to the West Bengal University Laws Amendment Bill, 2022. The bill seeks to replace the governor with the chief minister as the chancellor of state-run universities.

Justice Datta said this was a legislative decision and the governor could not indefinitely delay his decision on the bill.

Naidu complained that a large number of university officials were being transferred in Bengal without the governor’s consent or knowledge.

Senior advocate Jaideep Gupta, also representing the Bengal government, said the state had made a written request for a meeting to resolve the deadlock but the governor’s office had not responded yet.

The bench said it would pronounce a formal order on the entire issue at the next hearing, scheduled for October 31.

On September 15, the bench had asked the Bengal government, governor and the UGC to each suggest three to five names from which the court would pick the search committee for vice-chancellors.

On September 27, the bench had asked the Bengal government to submit a list of all state universities along with the disciplines taught, the existing provisions for the appointment of VCs, and details of the amendment bill.

It had also asked the state, governor and the UGC if they wanted to submit additional names for the search panel for full-term vice-chancellors.

The state had moved an application saying neither the chancellor nor the UGC had responded to the Bengal government’s communications and reminders seeking nominees for the search-and-selection committee.

The state government had approached the apex court after a division bench of Calcutta High Court had on June 28 dismissed a public interest plea that sought quashing of the chancellor’s unilateral appointments of VCs. The Bengal government had supported the PIL.