A major political storm has erupted in Tamil Nadu after Governor RN Ravi accused the MK Stalin-led state government of using police coercion to prevent Vice-Chancellors (VCs) from attending a Raj Bhavan-hosted conference. He went as far as comparing the situation to the Emergency era, drawing sharp criticism and fueling a larger constitutional debate.

Only 18 of 56 Vice-Chancellors Attend the Raj Bhavan Conference

The two-day annual Vice-Chancellors’ conference, scheduled for April 25-26 at the Raj Bhavan campus in Udhagamandalam (Ooty), was attended by only 18 of the 56 invited VCs. Notably, none of the 20 state-run university VCs participated, while only two state universities were represented by subordinate officials.

This conference was organized shortly after a Supreme Court ruling that favored the Tamil Nadu government’s power to appoint Vice-Chancellors and deemed its re-adopted education Bills as assented. The timing of the event — just days after the Governor’s meeting with Vice-President Jagdeep Dhankhar — raised eyebrows.

Governor Alleges Intimidation and Police Threats

Governor Ravi claimed that the VCs’ absence was not voluntary but a result of targeted intimidation by the Stalin government. In a strongly-worded post on social media, he wrote:

“The way Hon’ble CM Thiru. Stalin used police to deter the Vice-Chancellors of state universities from participating in the prescheduled conference today is reminiscent of the Emergency days.”

He alleged that telephonic threats from ministers were followed by direct police interference. According to the Governor, officers visited hotels in Ooty and issued late-night threats to VCs, warning of dire consequences if they attended the event. He also stated that Periyar University VC R Jagannathan was summoned to a police station on the day of the conference.

Governor Questions Stalin’s Intentions

The Governor accused the Tamil Nadu Chief Minister of trying to block educational progress. He wrote:

“Is it a police state? Don’t VCs have academic freedom? Or is CM Stalin afraid that improvement in state universities — which largely serve Dalit and poor students — could threaten his political future?”

The Vice-President of India, Jagdeep Dhankhar, who inaugurated the conference, emphasized the importance of implementing the National Education Policy (NEP). While acknowledging the poor turnout, he advised Governor Ravi not to take the absence personally, suggesting that multiple factors could have influenced the VCs’ decision.

State Government Ministers Respond

Reacting sharply to the Governor’s comments, Tamil Nadu Higher Education Minister K. Ponmudi and Minister Govi Chezhian defended the VCs’ absence. They asserted that the Governor was attempting to create a constitutional standoff following the SC ruling in favor of the state.

“The VCs know the law and Supreme Court’s ruling. Attending a meeting convened by the Governor would be contrary to the law,” said Minister Govi Chezhian.

The ministers added that the boycott was a legal and moral decision by the VCs and dismissed allegations of coercion as baseless. “How is the state government responsible for their absence if the VCs themselves chose to obey the law?” Chezhian asked.

Constitutional Face-Off Over Academic Authority

This confrontation highlights the larger power struggle between Governors and elected governments across India — especially over control of higher education and implementation of the NEP. Tamil Nadu, which has resisted the NEP citing regional and linguistic concerns, sees the Governor’s push as a political maneuver.

The incident underscores an ongoing conflict between academic autonomy, federal authority, and political influence in India’s education sector. With both sides refusing to budge, the future of Tamil Nadu’s higher education governance remains uncertain.

Categories: Politics, Tamil Nadu News, Education
Tags: RN Ravi, MK Stalin, Tamil Nadu education policy, VC boycott Tamil Nadu, NEP India, Raj Bhavan controversy, SC ruling on university bills, Tamil Nadu police intimidation, Governor vs State government