Court notice to IIT-M head on post
The legality of the appointment of the IIT-Madras director,
Bhaskar Ramamurthy, has been challenged in the Madras high court, where a
former IITian has filed a quo warranto petition. Justice D Hariparanthaman, before whom the petition filed by E Muralidharan of Chennai came up for hearing on Friday, ordered notices to the director and the Centre, returnable in three weeks.
In his petition, Muralidharan, who argued the case himself on Friday, said the director had been appointed without the mandatory approval of the Appointment Committee of Cabinet headed by the PM.
Noting that the President was the Visitor of the 15 IITs in the country, he said each IIT is managed by a 32-member council. The director is appointed by the council with prior approval of the Visitor, the petition said. In this regard, he said that Clause 15(3) of the statutes says: "The council may appoint an eminent person as director for a period not exceeding five years with a provision for renewal for further periods that every such appointment and terms thereof shall be subject to the prior approval of the Visitor."
Muralidharan, citing information obtained through the RTI Act, said the then human resources minister Kapil Sibal chaired the screening committee, the selection committee and the appointment committee. While the screening committee perused the applications of candidates, the selection committee made the appointment.
He said the minister had, in violation of laws, unilaterally appointed Ramamurthy as director of IIT-Madras, without the knowledge and approval of the council.
Noting that the council meant the entire council of members and not the chairman alone, the petition said the process was tweaked to favour Bhaskar Ramamurthy.
Another important anomaly in the appointment process, according to Muralidharan, was that though Ramamurthy had taken charge as IIT-Madras director on September 23, 2011, his appointment was ratified on January 7, 2013.
It wanted the high court to issue a writ of quo warranto to Ramamurthy asking him to show-cause as to under what authority he held the post of IIT-Madras director.
In his petition, Muralidharan, who argued the case himself on Friday, said the director had been appointed without the mandatory approval of the Appointment Committee of Cabinet headed by the PM.
Noting that the President was the Visitor of the 15 IITs in the country, he said each IIT is managed by a 32-member council. The director is appointed by the council with prior approval of the Visitor, the petition said. In this regard, he said that Clause 15(3) of the statutes says: "The council may appoint an eminent person as director for a period not exceeding five years with a provision for renewal for further periods that every such appointment and terms thereof shall be subject to the prior approval of the Visitor."
Muralidharan, citing information obtained through the RTI Act, said the then human resources minister Kapil Sibal chaired the screening committee, the selection committee and the appointment committee. While the screening committee perused the applications of candidates, the selection committee made the appointment.
He said the minister had, in violation of laws, unilaterally appointed Ramamurthy as director of IIT-Madras, without the knowledge and approval of the council.
Noting that the council meant the entire council of members and not the chairman alone, the petition said the process was tweaked to favour Bhaskar Ramamurthy.
Another important anomaly in the appointment process, according to Muralidharan, was that though Ramamurthy had taken charge as IIT-Madras director on September 23, 2011, his appointment was ratified on January 7, 2013.
It wanted the high court to issue a writ of quo warranto to Ramamurthy asking him to show-cause as to under what authority he held the post of IIT-Madras director.
Comments