President Droupadi Murmu’s decision to withhold assent to a law passed by the West Bengal legislature has halted the state government’s attempt to make the Chief Minister the chancellor of state-run universities, reinforcing the Governor’s role as the statutory head of public higher education institutions in the state.
The setback came after the President declined to approve the West Bengal University Laws Bill, 2022, which sought to replace the Governor with the Chief Minister as chancellor of government-aided and sponsored universities. With the Bill failing to secure presidential assent, the existing arrangement remains unchanged, leaving the Governor as chancellor across state universities.
Presidential refusal stalls Bengal’s chancellor overhaul, underscoring the limits of state legislative authority when proposed changes intersect with constitutional offices. Under Article 200 of the Constitution, a Governor may reserve certain Bills for the consideration of the President, whose assent is required for the legislation to come into force. In this case, the Bill was reserved and examined at the Union level, culminating in its rejection.
The proposed law was central to the state government’s broader effort to recalibrate governance in higher education. The administration had argued that vesting chancellorship in the elected head of the state would enhance accountability, streamline decision-making, and reduce what it described as administrative deadlock in universities. Supporters within the ruling party maintained that the move was consistent with democratic principles and similar models adopted elsewhere.
Opposition parties and legal scholars countered that the proposal undermined the constitutional balance by curtailing the Governor’s statutory role, particularly in a sector requiring institutional autonomy. They also flagged potential conflicts of interest, arguing that a Chief Minister serving as chancellor could blur the line between political executive power and academic governance.
The Bill’s journey reflected these tensions. Passed by the West Bengal Assembly in 2022, it faced immediate resistance from Raj Bhavan, with the Governor reserving it for presidential consideration. The Governor, who serves as Chancellor under existing state university laws, had publicly questioned the constitutionality of the change and warned against politicisation of campuses.
Legal experts note that the President’s decision carries significant implications beyond West Bengal. Education is a subject on the Concurrent List, allowing both the Union and states to legislate, but state laws must conform to constitutional provisions and, in some cases, obtain presidential assent. The refusal signals heightened scrutiny of state attempts to alter roles assigned to constitutional authorities.
University administrators say the decision preserves continuity but does not resolve longstanding friction between the state government and Raj Bhavan. Over the past few years, disagreements over vice-chancellor appointments, campus visits, and administrative directives have disrupted academic calendars and delayed key decisions. Several universities have functioned with interim leadership, affecting research funding, faculty recruitment, and accreditation processes.
Senior officials in the state government expressed disappointment, maintaining that the Bill was framed within constitutional parameters and aimed at improving governance. They indicated that legal options, including a possible reconsideration or fresh legislation, would be examined. Any renewed attempt, however, would need to address the constitutional concerns that prompted the President’s refusal.
From the Governor’s office, the decision was welcomed as a reaffirmation of the statutory framework governing universities. Raj Bhavan officials have consistently argued that the chancellor’s role is designed to act as a neutral arbiter, safeguarding academic standards and institutional independence from day-to-day political pressures.
Higher education analysts point out that the debate reflects a wider national conversation on university autonomy, federalism, and the balance between elected governments and constitutional offices. Several states have sought greater control over universities, citing efficiency and accountability, while courts and constitutional authorities have often emphasised the need for checks and balances.
VHP urges FIR over Babri Masjid foundation claim in Bengal 