Telling Tall Tales is a fortnightly column by Tara Krishnaswamy on matters that matter.
Even his die-hard opponents will concede that a signature motif throughout Prime Minister Narendra Modi's dozen years as Gujarat Chief Minister, was his unsparingly consistent dedication to federalism. It is therefore particularly disconcerting that the Union government exploits that original sin, the 42nd Amendment to the Constitution of India, which transferred several subjects, including education from the State list to the Concurrent list.
The Union is provided sanction to guzzle in state watering holes by the Concurrent list, and higher education is the flavour of the season. It is engineered through the University Grants Commission (UGC), a statutory body that functions as per the directions of the Union government. The mandate of the UGC is ensuring the quality of higher education and disbursal of grants to accredited institutions.
The power of this statutory body, as per the UGC Act of 1956 is, first of all, consultative with states and universities, even as it issues regulations to execute its mandates. Its regulations for teaching staff appointments, access, standard of instructions, facilities, fees charged, and degree granting, are laid before Parliament.
Even in the heady, early days of the first term of the Modi government, policy changes to centralise higher education entry, egress, appointments, funding, and regulations were heralded, disposing of states as equal partners. It came into effect with the National Education Policy (NEP) of 2020. No other large democracy has a similar centralised higher education policy with overarching regulatory and standardisation bodies, be it the United States of America, or the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) countries.
The NEP’s overbearing approach inhibits the flexibility over their curricula, pedagogy, and administration enjoyed by states and universities, while diffusing accountability on quality, output, and outcomes. It sits uncomfortably with the UGC Act's consultative framework.
Even as the UGC falters on its responsibilities, with paper leaks, organised gangs, exam cancellations, and fake universities, it has released a draft of its 2025 Regulations that stomp on the autonomy of universities. Anti-federal winds waft in with a new selection process for vice-chancellors of universities. The selection panel is to consist of three members; the chancellor, who is the Governor or Lieutenant Governor, the UGC Chair, and the university's apex body or Syndicate, completely obviating the state's role. The Chair of this panel, who used to be a nominee of the state government, has been downsized.
When coupled with the new lateral entry regulation that no longer requires basic academic qualifications, vice-chancellors need not be distinguished academics, and it opens up space for political appointees of the Union. Note that a vice-chancellor's role is that of the university's principal academic and chief executive, necessitating both scholastic and administrative preeminence.
What was UGC's rationale behind regulating vice-chancellor selections? Were universities being badly managed in terms of enrolments, standards, or outcomes? Or was the statutory body acting on the Union’s command? A look at the latest higher education survey from the Union government's AISHE 2020-21, should illustrate this.
As far as access to higher education goes, Bihar, Delhi, and Jharkhand have only eight colleges for every lakh of eligible population, while West Bengal has 13. At the higher end, Karnataka has 62, and the other southern states, along with Himachal Pradesh, Rajasthan, and Uttarakhand are in the 40s and 50s. This clearly points to states that need more colleges, be it state, Union-funded, or private.
Among the large states, the Gross Enrolment Ratio, or the proportion of eligible students who are admitted is worst in Bihar, Chhattisgarh, Jharkhand, and Assam – in the teens – and best in Tamil Nadu, Kerala, and Uttarakhand – in the 40s. With Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribe (SC/ST) enrolments, inequitable access is a problem everywhere except Tamil Nadu and Telangana. With Gender Parity, apart from Andhra Pradesh, Bihar, Maharashtra, Madhya Pradesh, Odisha, and Gujarat – which is the worst – all other states have greater enrolments of women compared to men. Again, the state-wise ratios clearly point to the need for regulatory intervention to ensure equitable access.
For teacher and staff appointments across all types of higher education institutions and modes of learning, the Pupil Teacher Ratio – the lower, the better – is best in Andhra Pradesh, Karnataka, Punjab, Tamil Nadu, and Telangana – in the teens – and worst in Delhi, Jharkhand, and Bihar — in their 50s and 60s. Data on social group and gender stratification is also available, and such metrics can quite easily be parameterised for grants, regulating both quality and compliance.
Graduation rates have not been provided, although the number of graduates by course, state, and social groups are available. From this, it is easy enough to determine institutional graduation rates at various levels.
The National Institutional Ranking Framework (NIRF) under the Ministry of Education ranks the 1113 or so universities in India — public, private, and deemed, combined. Across the 28 states and eight Union Territories, 45 of the top 100 universities are in the five southern states plus Pondicherry, with 22 in Tamil Nadu alone. Clearly, this indicates that the vice-chancellors of these institutions are reasonably chosen, and perform to expectations. This should also direct the UGC's energies to studying best practices from the better ranked states, bridging the gaps to meet a minimum standard across all states.
Remarkably, the Economic Survey 2024-25, from the Government of India, released on January 31, has this to say about the UGC and higher education:
"The regulatory framework (UGC/AICTE) currently includes over 50 regulations addressing different aspects of education and research. However, this approach does not fully align with the ‘light but tight’ regulatory model envisioned by the NEP … compliance is not essential for quality institutions. The challenges faced by the institutions vary, requiring tailored solutions … These have already achieved strong reputations in teaching, research, and placement of their students. These institutions have innovated on some dimensions of their functioning, and they should be encouraged to follow that path since that is the only way to compete with global institutions … It is important to embrace diversity and trust the genius of faculty and students to come up with frameworks that are novel, creative, and impactful on society. Institutions that desire to stand by their own hard-won reputations should be free to carve out their own path.”
The Economic Survey dons a velvet glove, encouraging the autonomy of higher education institutions, while the iron fist of the Union demotes them to government vassals with air-dropped vice-chancellors.
In thrusting its foot soldiers into state institutions, the Union is on a collision course with the states, much like an auto-immune chokehold. No wonder this provision has been variously termed, ''objectionable” by Karnataka, “catastrophic” by Bengal, a “bid to abolish states' rights” by Kerala, and an “attack on the Constitution itself” by Telangana. Tamil Nadu, going a step further, has conveyed its intent to pursue legal action. Eight states have echoed solidarity, including Jharkhand, Jammu and Kashmir, Himachal Pradesh, and Mizoram.
Already, governorship of states is running roughshod over elected governments in many states. The new UGC provision further entitles unelected, remote-controlled writ over the people's will. A paraphrasing of German pastor Martin Niemöller's atonement lends itself to the unilateral machinations of the Union government:
First, they demoted Ladakh, and Jammu and Kashmir to Union Territories, but I sneezed at it. Then they inserted a Lieutenant Governor in Delhi atop its elected government, but I turned the other cheek. Then they came for the Chief Justice of India, to inveigle themselves a new Chief Election Commissioner, but I shut one eye, and closed the other. Now they've come to anoint vice-chancellors, and it seems like the Prime Minister's trademark trope of federalism has been swapped for colonial imperialism.
Views expressed are the author's own.
Tara Krishnaswamy is a political creature with an urge to write. She works on political and policy communication.