Keep on Hold the Draft UGC Regulations, 2025 !

Keep on Hold the Draft UGC Regulations, 2025

H. Srikanth

On the 6th January Dharmendra Pradhan, the Union Minister of Education, released the Draft UGC Regulations2025 that sets new rules to appoint teachers and academic staff, and suggests measures for maintenance of standards in institutions of higher education in the country.

Jagdish Kumar, the UGC Chairperson, claims that the draft regulations infuse innovation, inclusivity, flexibility and dynamism in the higher education sector.

Ever since the government placed the draft on public domain for feedback, there have been intense debates on the implications of the proposals made in the draft. Such regulations are not new.

When the UPA was in power, the UGC came out with a comprehensive regulation for the same purpose in 2010. The 2010 regulations underwent some substantial amendments in 2013. After the NDA government came to power, in 2016, the UGC has amended the regulations again.

Within two years, the UGC came out with another regulations in 2018. And now, yet another regulations in 2025. No one knows how long these regulations, once adopted, will stay and not get superseded by another one by the UGC. Still, everyone concerned with higher education in the northeast should understand the changes proposed in the regulations.

Frequent changes in the regulations create problems for the aspiring candidates and also to the already recruited teachers in the universities and colleges. They do not know which rules govern their appointment or promotion. Only a few years back, the UGC imposed the UGC-Care list on the plea that only those who publish in the reputed journals would be considered for appointment and promotion.

But the draft regulations dispense with the UGC-Care list and allow the universities to appoint their own committees to decide which journals are reputed and which journal articles are standard ones. Further, the draft regulations make PG education irrelevant. It says that the department in which one has done Ph.D. and/or the subject in which one got NET would automatically a person to teach the PG students.

Further, it says that a person who has done the Four-Year UG Degree and has NET qualifications can become eligible for consideration of the post of Assistant Professor at the university. It is now not obligatory at all that one should have studied all basic papers in the discipline to teach students at the postgraduate (PG) level. This clause is incorporated in the regulations to push forward the NEP 2020 agenda. No one is against interdisciplinary studies.

But one should be first grounded and excel in one subject before foraying into other disciplines. Only having the Ph.D. or the NET qualification in a subject does not enable anyone the knowledge of the discipline. If one has not studied the discipline at PG level or gained knowledge of the discipline by teaching the subject at UG level for a few years, one should not be allowed to teach the PG students. 

To become a university teacher, what we basically need are sound academic background, experience in teaching, research and research guidance, and sound publications. But the regulations invoke other secondary qualifications such as consultancy, linkage with industry, policy relevance and knowledge of the so-called Indian Knowledge System (IKS) as equally relevant.

The teachers will be recruited or rewarded not for imparting knowledge, but for mobilizing finances and for being loyal to a particular political ideology. Why should the faculty members teaching philosophy, literature, political science or sociology have any links with the industry or possess knowledge of the IKS? Giving credence to secondary qualifications over the essential qualification leads to a decline in the quality of higher education. 

The regulations enable the selection committees to reject academically competent candidates and recruit or promote incompetent but influential or loyal persons. The regulations also push the idea of recruiting the so-called Professors of Practice. At one level, the UGC prescribes high academic qualifications for appointing regular professors, and at another level allows any industrialist, bureaucrat, or head of religious or social organization to become a university professor. 

One need not deny that there are exceptional talents in different walks of life whose association will be advantageous to the university. But when the universities are headed by the VCs who themselves are biased or persons with low integrity and academic credentials, there is every possibility of misusing the clause to recruit anyone close to the regime as Professors of Practice in the universities. 

Apart from setting the rules for the recruitment and promotion of faculty, the draft regulations talks about the appointment of the Vice-Chancellor in the central and state universities. Already the opposition ruled states are up against the regulations, as it deprives any powers to the state governments in the appointment of the VCs, although they provide infrastructure and shoulder maximum financial burden.

The regulations enable the central government to appoint VCs in all universities through the chancellors appointed by them. The move is being viewed by many as an attempt to take away education from the present concurrent list to the central list. These clauses in the draft denying the rights of the states have no relevance to the central universities, where, from the beginning, the appointment of the VCs depends on the decision of the UGC and the Union Ministry of Education. 

The northeastern states expect that the central government appoints good academicians who have experience in the administration of higher education. But most people in the region feel that the government dumps second or third grade academicians as the VCs of central universities in the northeast. There is a strong feeling that only those loyal to the government and its ideology are chosen as the VCs. Most VCs appointed have little knowledge of the people and the region.

They are interested in carrying ahead the central agenda to please their masters in Delhi. Far from mitigating such perceptions, the regulations talk about appointing persons from industry, bureaucracy, and public life as the VCs. The relevant clauses in the draft provide legal sanctity to the central government to appoint incompetent persons having no experience in higher education as the VCs of central universities in the northeast.

Finally, ignoring the fact that education is under the Concurrent List, the UGC draft regulations talk about penalizing the states and the institutions of higher education which do not abide by the regulations. It needs to be remembered that the UGC came into existence through an Act of the Parliament to provide grants to the universities and encourage quality teaching and research. Its powers are advisory in nature.

But by providing grants, the UGC sought to extend control over different universities and higher education institutions. However, of late, the UGC has been withdrawing different grants provided to the universities. It scrapped the UGC Research Fellowships and UGC-SAP program. Recently, the central government has drastically reduced funds for the UGC.

As such, the UGC itself is not in a position to provide adequate financial grants to the institutions for building and maintenance of the infrastructure. The universities and colleges are encouraged to take loan from Higher Education Financing Agency (HEFA) to build additional infrastructure. No new teaching positions are granted in the existing departments and the universities are advised to start self-financing courses and pay the teachers’ salaries from the heavy fee collected from the students.

After the establishment of NAAC, the UGC has become irrelevant in matters of evaluating and advising about the quality of teaching and research in the universities. As such, the UGC has been deviating from the original tasks assigned to the institution. Such an institution is talking about penalizing the universities and states which do not follow the NEP 2020 and the proposed UGC regulations. 

Not just the opposition ruled states, several education loving citizens and organizations in the country also view the draft regulations undemocratic and anti-constitutional. They have been demanding for withdrawal of the regulations. The regulations in the present form show no solution to the problems of higher education in the northeastern states. If implemented, they pose a great threat to the autonomy of the universities.

It is a good practice to take feedback from the public. But the proper democratic forum to decide on national education policy is the Indian Parliament. The draft regulations should be placed for discussion in the parliament. Let the people’s representatives in the parliament debate and decide on regulations needed for running the institutions of higher education in the country.   

Prof. H. Srikanth teaches in Department of Political Science, NEHU, Shillong. This article first published in the Shillong Times.

27-02-2025

Mahabahu.com is an Online Magazine with collection of premium Assamese and English articles and posts with cultural base and modern thinking.  You can send your articles to editor@mahabahu.com / editor@mahabahoo.com (For Assamese article, Unicode font is necessary) Images from different sources.