The draft guidelines by the University Grants Commission (UGC) empowering Chancellors, or the Governors in many states, to constitute a three-member search-cum-selection committee for appointing Vice-Chancellors (VCs) have sparked significant controversy, especially in states led by opposition parties such as Tamil Nadu, West Bengal, Punjab, Himachal and Kerala. The implications of this shift in power, coupled with the warning that non-implementation of these guidelines could lead to debarment from UGC schemes, have far-reaching consequences on the governance of state universities, autonomy, and the relationship between the Centre and state governments. The latest developments, when viewed through the lens of India’s federal structure and the ongoing conflict over the role of Governors in educational governance, reveal the political complexities and the struggle for autonomy within the educational sphere.
Implications for the Opposition-Ruled States
The implications of the UGC’s draft guidelines are profound for opposition-led states. These states, particularly those like West Bengal, Kerala, and Tamil Nadu, have historically viewed their educational institutions as critical spaces for intellectual and political autonomy. The fear now is that the central government, through the office of the Governor, could exercise undue influence over these institutions, effectively stifling independent thought and expression.
In a state like West Bengal, where the conflict between the Mamata Banerjee-led government and the Governor has been well-documented, the new draft guidelines may further exacerbate tensions. The Mamata government has frequently accused the Governor of trying to control university appointments and interfering in the state’s educational policies. With the new guidelines, the potential for an even greater centralization of power in the hands of the Governor — who is often seen as an agent of the central government — is a cause for concern.
In Kerala, where the Left Democratic Front (LDF) government has maintained a tense relationship with the Governor, the implementation of these guidelines could lead to an increased politicization of academic appointments. The Kerala government, which has a strong commitment to educational autonomy, may view the guidelines as a direct challenge to the state’s rights to govern its own educational institutions.
Tamil Nadu CM MK Stalin | X
Moreover, in Tamil Nadu, the ruling DMK has been outspoken in its opposition to the Governor’s role in university appointments. The DMK has accused the Governor of trying to control academic institutions to further the interests of the central government, and the new UGC guidelines would only serve to strengthen these fears. The state’s government has repeatedly called for a more democratic and transparent process for selecting VCs, one that reflects the interests of the people of Tamil Nadu rather than external political forces.
Centralization of Power and the Role of Governors
At the heart of this controversy is the question of who should have the final say in appointing VCs. In the past, state governments, which are in control of their respective educational institutions, typically constituted search committees to recommend candidates for the VC position. However, the new UGC draft guidelines shift this responsibility primarily to the Governors, in their role as Chancellors of state-run universities.
The draft proposal has generated significant concern in opposition-ruled states. Critics argue that the central government, through the UGC, is attempting to undermine the autonomy of state governments by granting Governors — who are appointed by the President of India and generally belong to the ruling party at the Centre — greater control over state universities. This could effectively politicize the selection process, undermining academic independence and turning educational appointments into political tools.
Governors, traditionally seen as neutral figures, have, in recent years, become a point of contention, particularly in Tamil Nadu, West Bengal, and Kerala. These states, governed by parties in opposition to the central government, have had ongoing disputes with their Governors over various issues, including the appointment of VCs. In some instances, state governments have accused Governors of overstepping their constitutional role, acting as agents of the central government, and interfering in the state’s autonomy.
The new UGC draft guidelines, by formalizing the role of Governors in VC appointments, deepen these concerns. The most significant fear among state governments is that the central government could use the position of the Governor to exert influence over educational institutions in opposition-ruled states. This has led to accusations that the central government is attempting to centralize control over the academic appointments of state universities.
Autonomy of State Universities
Universities, being the pillars of higher education, need to function autonomously to maintain academic standards and safeguard their freedom of thought and expression. However, this new intervention by the UGC, especially in states with ongoing conflicts between the Governors and the state governments, raises questions about the autonomy of universities.
The imposition of such guidelines, scholars and academicians and intellectuals argue, is an infringement on the autonomy of state-run educational institutions. By empowering the Governor to select the search committees, the central government risks politicizing the appointment process and ensuring that the selected Vice-Chancellors are aligned with the political agenda of the Centre. This could have a chilling effect on academic freedom, as VCs appointed under such a system might feel compelled to align with the ideological positions of the ruling government, thereby reducing the independence of academic institutions.
In opposition-ruled states, the fears are particularly acute. For instance, Tamil Nadu has had long-standing issues with the office of the Governor, which has been seen as politically aligned with the ruling party in Delhi. The DMK government in Tamil Nadu has consistently clashed with the Governor over the appointment of VCs, with accusations of interference in the state’s educational matters. The new draft guidelines, in this context, are seen as an effort to weaken the state’s ability to manage its educational institutions without undue external influence.
Legal and Constitutional Concerns
Another significant concern that arises from the UGC’s draft guidelines is the potential violation of constitutional provisions regarding the autonomy of state governments. The Constitution of India provides for a federal structure of governance, which gives states considerable power over matters that fall within their jurisdiction. Education is a concurrent subject under the Constitution, meaning both the Centre and the states can legislate on educational matters. However, the growing centralization of power in the hands of the Governor raises concerns about whether the Centre is encroaching on the state’s constitutional rights.
The Governor’s role as Chancellor is a contested issue in several states, and these new UGC guidelines may lead to legal challenges, as opposition-ruled states may argue that the guidelines violate the principles of federalism. States may also contend that they have the right to manage their own educational institutions without interference from the Centre or the Governor.
Conclusion
The UGC’s draft guidelines on the appointment of Vice-Chancellors and the expanded role of Governors have created significant controversy, particularly in opposition-led states such as Tamil Nadu, West Bengal, and Kerala. While the guidelines aim to streamline the process of VC appointments and ensure uniformity across institutions, they also raise serious concerns about the autonomy of state universities, the potential for politicization, and the undermining of federal principles.
For opposition-ruled states, the implementation of these guidelines may escalate tensions with the central government and further deepen the divide between the Centre and the states. The growing centralization of power over education could have long-term implications for the governance of state universities and the overall functioning of India’s higher education system. Moving forward, it will be crucial for the UGC and the government to address these concerns in a way that respects the autonomy of states while ensuring a fair and transparent process for selecting Vice-Chancellors. The outcome of the public consultations, scheduled for 30 days, will likely shape the future of India’s educational governance and its federal structure.
(Second last part tomorrow. Critical Assessment of the UGC Draft Regulations 2025 for Faculty Recruitment: Drawbacks and Concerns)
(Writer is senior political analyst and strategic affairs columnist)
