Failure to reinstate Kerala University registrar: HC summons vice-chancellor

Kochi: High court has ordered Kerala University vice-chancellor Mohan Kunnummal to appear before it on March 11 in a contempt of court petition filed for failing to comply with the court's directive to implement the university syndicate's decision reinstating K S Anil Kumar as the varsity's registrar.The bench of Justice P V Kunhikrishnan further clarified that his appearance would be dispensed with if the court's directives are complied with or if the judgment or order is varied or modified. HC was considering a petition filed by Anil Kumar alleging that the vice-chancellor (VC) failed to comply with HC's judgment dated Sept 10, 2025, which directed him to implement the syndicate's decision. While considering the petition, the court observed that a high court judgment cannot be kept in cold storage by a VC of a university.Anil Kumar was suspended from the post of registrar by the VC on July 2, 2025, in connection with his decision to cancel, at the last minute, permission for a programme scheduled to be held at the varsity Senate Hall on June 25, 2025, following a controversy over the display of a portrait of Bharat Mata on the dais. Later, the university syndicate revoked his suspension. However, he was not reinstated, which prompted the petitioner to move HC.In that petition, HC directed the VC to convene a meeting of the syndicate to consider whether the suspension should be continued, leaving it to the syndicate to decide accordingly. HC further ordered that the syndicate's decision would be binding on VC, who would have to give effect to it, subject to the powers of the chancellor.However, the petitioner again approached HC with a contempt petition alleging that even after the syndicate decided to reinstate him as registrar, the VC failed to implement the decision. The VC's counsel submitted that the matter had been placed before the chancellor and that a decision was awaited.HC observed that, as per its earlier order, the syndicate's decision is binding on the VC. A perusal of the minutes of the syndicate meeting, it noted, showed that the VC was objecting to the syndicate's decision itself. HC opined that this prima facie indicated contempt and accordingly directed him to appear on March 11.