Why in the News?

Various groups have raised concerns about the Draft UGC Regulations, 2025, which outline qualifications for appointing and promoting university teachers and aim to maintain standards in higher education.

What are the primary reservations expressed regarding the Draft UGC Regulations, 2025?

• Reduced Role of State Executives in V-C Appointments: The draft regulations limit the State government’s involvement in the search-cum-selection process, despite State universities being funded and established by State legislatures. Example: In the Gambhirdan K. Gadhvi vs State of Gujarat (2019) case, the Supreme Court ruled that State executive members cannot be part of the V-C selection committee, reducing their influence.
• Broadening of Eligibility Criteria for Vice-Chancellors: Expanding the eligibility to include individuals from public policy, government, and private sectors may dilute academic rigor and expertise. Example: Between 2010 and 2018, the UGC regulations required 10 years of professorship or equivalent academic experience, ensuring a focus on research-based qualifications.

Why has the Supreme Court of India ruled against the involvement of the State executive in the selection process of Vice-Chancellors?

• Ensuring Compliance with UGC Regulations: The Court upheld the UGC’s 2018 regulations, which specify that only a UGC representative, not a State executive member, should be included in the search-cum-selection committee. Example: In Professor (Dr.) Sreejith P.S vs Dr. Rajasree M.S. (2022), the Court invalidated the V-C’s appointment because the selection process did not follow UGC norms.
• Preventing Arbitrary Appointments: The Court held that allowing State executives to influence the selection process could lead to biased or politically motivated appointments, compromising merit-based selection. Example: In Dr. Premachandran Keezhoth vs The Chancellor, Kannur University (2023), the Court declared the V-C appointment void due to the involvement of the State executive, reinforcing the need for an independent selection process.
• Preserving Autonomy and Neutrality: The Court emphasized that the Vice-Chancellor’s appointment process should be free from political or administrative influence to maintain the academic institution’s autonomy and impartiality. Example: In Gambhirdan K. Gadhvi vs State of Gujarat (2019), the Court ruled that State executive members cannot be part of the selection committee to prevent undue influence.

Who are the key stakeholders affected by the proposed changes in the search-cum-selection process?

• State Governments and State Universities: The reduced role of State executives limits their ability to shape the leadership of State-funded universities, affecting regional educational priorities and innovation. Example: State governments argue that universities play a critical role in addressing local development needs, which may be overlooked if the selection process is centralized.
• University Governance Bodies: University executive bodies lose direct influence over the V-C selection, reducing their ability to align leadership with institutional goals and academic vision. Example: Central University statutes follow a similar model where the Chancellor, UGC, and university bodies are key decision-makers, excluding executive government officials.
• Academic and Non-Academic Professionals: The broadened eligibility criteria open leadership positions to individuals from non-academic backgrounds, changing the traditional focus on academic excellence. Example: The draft regulations allow candidates with experience in public policy or industry, which some argue may dilute the focus on academic scholarship.

Which options should be suggested to balance the State executive’s concerns? (Way forward)

• State Nominee with Specific Criteria: Permit the State executive to nominate one member to the search-cum-selection committee, provided the nominee is a distinguished academic with no active government role. Example: Similar to the Union Public Service Commission (UPSC) guidelines, the nominee could be a retired academic leader who is free from political affiliations.
• Increased Consultation Mechanism: Introduce a pre-selection consultation phase where the State executive provides inputs on regional needs without directly influencing the final selection. Example: The university executive could hold formal discussions with the State to ensure the selected V-C aligns with local educational and developmental goals.

Mains PYQ:

Q The quality of higher education in India requires major improvement to make it internationally competitive. Do you think that the entry of foreign educational institutions would help improve the quality of technical and higher education in the country. Discuss.  (UPSC IAS/2015)

Get an IAS/IPS ranker as your 1: 1 personal mentor for UPSC 2024

Attend Now