The Supreme Court has intervened to limit the Kerala Governor’s discretionary control as chancellor, directing that the state chief minister may set the priority order of vice-chancellor candidates and that the chancellor should ordinarily appoint from that list unless specific, documented objections are raised. To ensure impartiality, the court appointed retired judge Sudhanshu Dhulia to chair search-cum-selection committees and authorised logistical support and an honorarium for his role.

The ruling also excluded the UGC nominee from the current search panels, prompting debate about central representation on state selection bodies. The bench clarified that residual disputes between the chancellor and the state would be resolved judicially after hearing both sides, preferring judicial adjudication over prolonged administrative deadlock. Proponents of the judgment say it will streamline appointments, reduce politicisation and help universities escape chronic vacancies that hamper research and governance. Critics warn that shifting powers closer to the executive could erode important institutional checks, and urge simultaneous strengthening of transparent selection criteria and timelines. Legal experts note this decision could become a reference point for other federal jurisdictions facing chancellor-state tensions, potentially reshaping how VCs are selected in India’s federated university system.

Early practical impacts are expected at universities where prolonged vacancies have affected research supervision and governance—courts and universities will likely prioritise filling positions to restore academic momentum. Experts recommend concomitant statutory clarity to align selection norms with NEP objectives and transparency.