Skip to main content

Govt of India seeking to "centralise" all higher education powers: Proposed commission will be just an advisory body

By Gautam Thaker*
The Ministry of Human Resource Development (MHRD), Government of India's draft enactment for forming Higher Education Commission (HEC) by scrapping the University Grants Commission (UGC) is meant to concentrate on educational matters in the hands of MHRD by placing all financial matters under the direct control of the Ministry. This means that MHRD will decide whether or not to give grant, or how much grant to give to an institution. This will result in direct intervention by MHRC.
Such a situation is dangerous for the autonomy and independence of higher educational institutes as well as overall independence in the field of education.
The Central government’s motto is “Together with all, Development for all” (sabka saath, sabka vikas). Yet, it gave just nine days’ time to react to the draft Act on the proposed Commission. When the government convenes so many official meetings for preparing the draft education policy, it is difficult to understand as to why is it in such haste to pass an Act for higher education.
It appears that the government is looking for obedient or yes-men as faculty in colleges and universities, and is desirous of passing the Act without necessary discussions on it. And by notifying the draft Act and calling for suggestions, the government is merely aiming to pretend that it follows high standards of transparency, participative involvement and good governance.
Highly dangerous provisions have been made in Articles 24 and 25 of the draft Act. An Advisory Committee is proposed to be constituted in accordance with Article 24, and its Chairman will be minister of Human Resource Development.
This committee is proposed to consist of Chairman/Vice-Chairman of this Commission, as also Chairmen/Vice-Chairmen and members of state-level Councils of Higher Education. In Gujarat, the Chairman of this Council is the chief minister.
The Advisory Committee will meet every six months and it will coordinate the working of State and Central governments for higher education. It will look into issues of coordination for the implementation of projected targets of higher education and will find solutions.
The Commission’s implementation will be based on the advice given to it by the Advisory Committee. Notably, as regards implementation, the word “shall” is used instead of the word “may”. This means that the Commission has to compulsorily implement whatever advice has been given to the Commission by the Advisory Committee. This poses the question: What is the need of the Commission? Clearly, the Commission, as proposed, has no autonomy.
Article 25 of the proposed Act also deals a severe blow to the autonomy and independence of the Commission as also institutions of higher education. Article 25(1) stipulates that the Commission will function only in the context of the directions given by the Central government on the national objective related to policy matter issues. Moreover, the Article 25 (2) provides that, in case the Commission is in disagreement on the decision of the Central government, the decision of the Central government will prevail.
The mention of policy matter is made and under Article 25(2) alongside ‘any matter’. Clearly, the Commission itself will not be able to act as an autonomous body but will have to act as if it is a sort of a department of the government. Further, in this Article, it has not been stated as to who the Central government is.
It can either be any secretary, any minister or Prime Minister, or even an employee, and his/her advice will be binding on the Commission. The Commission will have to abide by it, otherwise it can be viewed as denigration of duty, and the Central government, if it so wishes, can dissolve and nullify the Commission. This means that all the powers are vested in the Central government and the Commission would have no powers to exercise.
In a press statement, it has been stated that the proposed Act would apply to all institutions of higher education, but not on institutes which have been declared by the government as institutes of national importance.
This way, higher education institutes have been divided into two categories. There will be a handful of research and teaching institutes of national importance, but majority of institutes will be without any national importance, with whom the government will deal in a discriminative manner. Obviously, majority of colleges in villages, towns and major cities will be bereft of the “national importance” category.
Strangely, even a non-resident Indian can become a Chairman of the Commission. This means that, just as one American Indian was the first chairman of the Planning Commission, this can also become applicable in this case. The question arises is, how can one, who has stayed abroad for many years, be aware of the situation actually prevailing in the country?
The Article 42(2)(E) of the Act states that any member, even chairman or vice-chairman of the Commission, can be terminated from his/her post on charges of moral turpitude. If they have committed any crime and the court has found them guilty then, it may treat as a moral turpitude.
But if the government does not consider it so, then it may not sack them! Thus, the government has kept the window open to function in an arbitrary manner. As per its definition of moral turpitude, the government can do anything it pleases, to any person, and at any time.
Article 15(4)(J) stipulates that, in order to bring transparency in the decision process and management of institutions of higher education, and to bring about efficiency, the Commission can recommend to formulate faculty-centric administrative structure.
Here, the word ‘recommend’ has been used and not ‘direct’, which means that the Commission will be contented merely by offering recommendations to colleges and universities. Everyone knows how much is the participation of faculty members in the administration of institutions of higher education.
Further, the word ‘regime’ has been used in place of the word ‘administration’ or ‘management’. In the ordinary meaning of the word, ‘regimes’ include basic elements of transparency, accountability, decentralization, participation, rule of law and human rights. Concern of none of the elements, anywhere, has been taken care of in the draft Act.
With the use of this Act, it is claimed, control can be exercised on bogus institutes, which cheat guardians and students, or on colleges or universities which are neither functioning as per the norms of UGC, or those that do not have infrastructural facilities conforming to its norms.
There cannot be any objection against punishment or penalty imposed on those establishing and managing such institutes. This task can be done by the existing UGC Act, or by bringing in an amendment. But it is a common knowledge that it has not been done, because those establishing such institutes are having strong political clout.
It is a major question as to why UGC has given approval or registration to such institutes for awarding degree or diploma. In the guise of imposing punishment or penalty to such criminals in the higher education front, swooping on the autonomy of all higher education institutes and their faculty is a matter which contravenes the educational freedom and autonomy.
The proposed Act is being introduced to annihilate whatever educational freedom that is prevailing in colleges and universities. Pursuant to this Act, the Commission has been given powers to close down on-going colleges or universities; those which would be established hereafter can also be closed down at any time, which as a matter of fact shows the conspiracy on the part of the government to tighten its control on higher education.
It appears that, with the implementation of this Act, whatever little liberty is being experienced by all the institutes of higher education in the context of State governments and universities established by laws passed by State Legislature Assemblies, will come to an end.
Under the Section 7 of the Constitution higher education is also the task of the State governments. Hence, it is not at all reasonable if the Commission or the Central government take over almost all the powers of higher education vested with State governments. This should be a major reason why State governments should oppose the proposed Act.
The Central government believes that it can enslave universities, colleges and research institutes and it alone is the sole carrier of thinking power and intelligence, and all others should follow it. The only desire of the Central government is to reduce faculty members to the category of insects.
Such is the mindset of the present government that it always boasts of creating something new; it is such mindset alone, which is behind its effort to capture all powers of higher education through the proposed Act. Indeed, it resembles Rowlatt Act, a black law of colonial times, and it should never be enacted. The Gujarat Social Watch demands that the draft of this Act should be withdrawn.
---
*President, Indian Radical Human Association. Based on author's representation to Prakash Javdekar, minister, Human Resource Development, Government of India

Comments

TRENDING

Buddhist shrines massively destroyed by Brahmanical rulers in "pre-Islamic" era: Historian DN Jha's survey

By Our Representative
Prominent historian DN Jha, an expert in India's ancient and medieval past, in his new book, "Against the Grain: Notes on Identity, Intolerance and History", in a sharp critique of "Hindutva ideologues", who look at the ancient period of Indian history as "a golden age marked by social harmony, devoid of any religious violence", has said, "Demolition and desecration of rival religious establishments, and the appropriation of their idols, was not uncommon in India before the advent of Islam".

RSS' 25,000 Shishu Mandirs 'follow' factory school model of Christian missionaries

By Bhabani Shankar Nayak*
The executive committee of the International Union of Anthropological and Ethnological Sciences (IUAES) recently decided to drop the KISS University in Odisha as the co-host of the World Anthropology Congress-2023. The decision is driven by the argument that KISS University is a factory school.

India must recognise: 4,085 km Himalayan borders are with Tibet, not China

By Tenzin Tsundue, Sandeep Pandey*
There has as been a cancerous wound around India’s Himalayan neck ever since India's humiliating defeat during the Chinese invasion of India in 1962. The recent Galwan Valley massacre has only added salt to the wound. It has come to this because, when China invaded the neighbouring country Tibet in 1950, India was in high romance with the newly-established communist regime under Mao Zedong after a bloody revolution.

Swami Vivekananda's views on caste and sexuality were 'painfully' regressive

By Bhaskar Sur*
Swami Vivekananda now belongs more to the modern Hindu mythology than reality. It makes a daunting job to discover the real human being who knew unemployment, humiliation of losing a teaching job for 'incompetence', longed in vain for the bliss of a happy conjugal life only to suffer the consequent frustration.

Time to give Covid burial, not suspend, World Bank's 'flawed' Doing Business ranking

By Maju Varghese*
On August 27, the World Bank came out with a statement suspending the Doing Business Report. The statement said that a number of irregularities have been reported regarding changes to the data in the Doing Business 2018 and Doing Business 2020 reports, published in October 2017 and 2019. The changes in the data were inconsistent with the Doing Business methodology.

Delhi riots: Cops summoning, grilling, intimidating young to give 'false' evidence

Counterview Desk
More than 440 concerned citizens have supported the statement issued by well-known bureaucrat-turned-human rights activist Harsh Mander ‘We will not be silenced’ which said that the communal riots in Delhi in February 2020 have not been caused by any conspiracy, as alleged by the Delhi Police, but by “hate speech and provocative statements made by a number of political leaders of the ruling party.”

WHO chief ignores India, cites Pak as one of 7 top examples in fight against Covid-19

By Our Representative
In a move that would cause consternation in India’s top policy makers in the Modi government, Dr Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus, World Health Organization (WHO) director-general, has singled out Pakistan among seven countries that have set “examples” in investing in a healthier and safer future in order to fight the Covid-19 pandemic.

Tata Mundra: NGOs worry as US court rules World Bank can't be sued for 'damages'

By Kate Fried, Mir Jalal*
On August 24 evening, a federal court ruled that the World Bank Group cannot be sued for any damage caused by its lending, despite last year’s Supreme Court ruling in the same case that these institutions can be sued for their “commercial activity” in the United States.

Online education 'driving' digital divide: $1.97 bn industry's paid users grow at 6x rate

Counterview Desk
The People’s Union for Civil Liberties (PUCL), Maharashtra, in a new report in the series on Lockdown on Civil Liberties focusing on education has said that there is a huge “push-out” children due during the pandemic, with deepening digital-divide playing a major role.