MINISTERS have threatened to sack the board of a Glasgow college at the centre of a row over the suspension of its principal.

Angela Constance, the Education Secretary, has written to Clyde College's senior management warning them a "possible outcome" is their removal.

Under the 1992 Further and Higher Education Act ministers have the power to remove college boards - but only after an order is placed before the Scottish Parliament.

The letter is understood to raise a number of concerns over the way the board has acted after college principal Susan Walsh was suspended on full pay by chairman of the board George Chalmers in February.

Ms Constance has raised the issue of breaches of financial rules understood to be in relation to ongoing legal fees, which have topped £100,000.

She is also concerned the college has had no principal since February and that the relationship between the board and student representatives appeared to have broken down.

A Scottish Government spokesman said: “The Education Secretary wrote to all board members at Glasgow Clyde College about concerns relating to its governance, including those raised by a number of staff and students.

"In line with the offer in her letter, Ms Constance met the chair and some of the board this week and the board has been given time to respond fully to the concerns outlined in her letter.

"Our priority is to ensure the students and staff at Glasgow’s colleges are well-served and we will continue to work closely with Glasgow Clyde College to ensure this is the case."

A statement from the college board said: "Representatives of the board met the Cabinet Secretary on Monday. This was the first opportunity the board have had to put their views directly to the Cabinet Secretary about the current situation.

"The board representatives answered the specific allegations and concerns on governance raised by the Cabinet Secretary and agreed to provide a detailed written response, which will include the board’s plans for the future.

"We were pleased the Cabinet Secretary listened to what we had to say and we assured her that the board will continue to act in the best interests of the college, its students and staff."

The intervention comes seven months after Mrs Walsh was suspended after concerns over her style of management and allegations of bullying were raised by senior officials from the college branch of the Educational Institute of Scotland (EIS) teaching union - although the wider membership did not see the document.

An official survey of lecturers found 24 per cent agreed with the statement that they had been "bullied or harassed" in the past year, but no formal proceedings have ever been brought.

Shortly after the suspension, the Scottish Funding Council (SFC) initiated its own investigation into the way the issue was handled.

The report by law firm DLA Piper found Mrs Walsh was told about her impending suspension in a corridor within earshot of other staff - although this is disputed by some college officials.

Despite this, the report accepted the decision to suspend the principal was taken by Mr Chalmers on the basis of legal advice that took a "clear view" that suspension was "both recommended and warranted" in the circumstances. And he acted, the report said, "under express delegated authority set out in the constitution of the college".

The report did not recommend sanctions against board members, but made suggestions over how governance could be improved in all colleges in the future.