The controversy over the University Grants Commission’s recent draft regulations refuses to die down with criticism from states such as Tamil Nadu and Kerala, and allegations that it is a bid to “centralise and corporatise” higher education.
The draft regulations — Minimum Qualifications for Appointment and Promotion of Teachers and Academic Staff in Universities and Colleges and Measures for Maintenance of Standards in Higher Education — claim to represent the objectives of the National Education Policy. Among various changes, the draft proposes to change the vice-chancellor selection process, evaluation metrics, and teacher recruitment. The commission has invited feedback until February 5 and is expected to issue the final draft in March.
Meanwhile, editorials in prominent dailies also weighed in on Monday.
The Indian Express, in an editorial headlined “campus unfreedom”, noted that the draft UGC (Minimum Qualifications for Appointment and Promotion of Teachers and Academic Staff in Universities and Colleges) Regulations 2025 “signal a welcome change in the regulator’s approach, but only to an extent”.
It said that by strengthening the role of state governors in appointing university heads, the draft rules mark “a disappointing departure from the NEP’s thrust on institutional autonomy. Worse, they signal once again that the sarkar, in this case, the Centre, is the arbiter of excellence.”
The paper pointed out that opening the VC’s post to professionals outside academia could increase the pool of experts required to helm higher education institutions. “Realising the potency of these liberalising initiatives, will, however, require unshackling the university ecosystem from the centralising tendencies of the past, when several VCs were treated as political appointees.”
The Hindu noted that in a federal setup, attempts at undermining any stakeholder in the subject matter of education, which is in the concurrent list, will prove disruptive. It said that this comes against the backdrop of conflicts between state governments and Raj Bhavans on appointing VCs, “which have deprived several universities, particularly in Tamil Nadu, of leadership. Naturally, opposition has come from several states, including Tamil Nadu, which passed a House resolution urging the Centre to immediately withdraw the draft.”
“Demonstrating the Centre’s penchant for facilitating control over institutions through gubernatorial proxies, it proposes to divest State governments of their role in the selection process for Vice Chancellor (VC) of universities. All powers are sought to be vested in the Chancellor — i.e., the Governor in most State universities — by taking away the function of constituting the search-cum-selection committee from the higher education departments. Such a committee would comprise a nominee each of the Chancellor; UGC Chairman; and of the respective university syndicate/senate. The Chancellor would appoint the VC out of three to five names recommended by the committee. Any violations, the draft warns, could attract debarment from participating in UGC schemes and denial of funding under the UGC Act.”
The Deccan Herald said that universities are formed by acts of state legislatures and they are funded by state governments. “The UGC has no mandate to control and regulate the functioning of the universities, even if education is in the Concurrent List of the Constitution. Appointment of vice-chancellors is a contentious issue in most states ruled by non-BJP parties. Some state governments have sought to take the power away from the governors because of the controversies and conflicts they have created as chancellors. The UGC is giving that power to the governors in an absolute fashion. State governments and teachers of universities have strongly opposed the regulations. The Central government is trying to control education in various ways, such as changing the syllabus. The UGC move, which is the Central government’s move, is intended to extend political and administrative control over the universities and the entire higher education sector. It will be strongly resisted by the states, universities and others.”
Last week, an editorial in The Tribune had said that “it is argued that these changes will foster flexibility and inclusivity, yet the draft’s rushed timeline for feedback — 30 days — raises concerns about genuine stakeholder engagement”.
“Such sweeping reforms demand careful deliberation to safeguard academia from being reduced to a political battleground or a marketplace for short-term contracts. India’s higher education institutions are pillars of intellectual and cultural progress. The UGC must ensure that reforms strengthen, rather than erode, their academic foundations. Anything less risks undermining the very purpose of education.”
In times of misinformation, you need news you can trust. We’ve got you covered. Subscribe to Newslaundry and power our work.
To help us uncover issues that usually get lost in a high-octane campaign, contribute to our new NL Sena on the upcoming Delhi elections.
Newslaundry is a reader-supported, ad-free, independent news outlet based out of New Delhi. Support their journalism, here.
