At the core of academic freedom lies the unquestionable right of universities and their respective governments to shape their educational destiny. Yet today, under the carefully worded guise of “reform,” the Central government appears not to be strengthening this principle, but rather systematically dismantling it. We are witnessing progress, but a calculated centralisation of control, where autonomy is sacrificed at the altar of uniformity.

The recent Lok Sabha reply by the Ministry of Education to Unstarred Question No. 2698 (March 17, 2025), raised by Member of Parliament Praniti Sushilkumar Shinde, exposes this trend in no uncertain terms. The answer, couched in bureaucratic niceties and vague affirmations, is a glaring reflection of the Centre’s unwillingness to respect the federal structure and its growing appetite for centralised control over higher education.

The issue is not only about who appoints Vice-Chancellors or how new regulations are drafted; it concerns who gets to determine the future of Indian academia and, more importantly, who does not.

Diluting Federalism in the Name of Reform

The University Grants Commission (UGC) was envisioned as a neutral, academic body focused on ensuring standards in higher education. Over the decades, it has slowly evolved into a tool for enforcing Central directives, while the government claims in its reply that the draft of UGC Regulations 2025 “reinforces India’s federal structure.”

But actions speak louder than words. The proposed changes, particularly the mechanism for the appointment of Vice-Chancellors, strip away the powers of state governments and universities, handing them over to Centrally dominated statutory bodies. By proposing that Vice-Chancellors be selected by a “Search-cum-Selection Committee” constituted by so-called “impartial statutory bodies,” the Centre has found a backdoor to insert its preferences into university leadership.

This is a direct attack on the constitutional mandate that education is a subject on the Concurrent List, where both the Centre and States must have a say. No clear explanation is given on who nominates these statutory bodies, how they are formed, or how “impartiality” is ensured. This intentional ambiguity raises serious concerns about political appointments disguised as administrative reforms.

In practice, this allows the Union Government to bypass state government recommendations, ignore the needs of regional academic ecosystems, and plant ideologically aligned individuals at the helm of universities. What is being presented as reform is, in reality, a clear case of regulatory capture.

Through the back door, this proposal to allow non-academics to become Vice-Chancellors is a case in point. The government claims this will bring “diverse expertise” and “leadership excellence.” Unfortunately, in reality, this opens the gates for bureaucrats, ex-police officers, retired IAS officers, and politically affiliated persons to take charge of academic institutions, many of whom may have little understanding of research, and academic freedom.

Apart from the protest of noted academicians against the Draft UGC Regulations, the government’s narrative also ignores the fears raised by state governments and teachers’ associations, who have warned that this regulation will stifle dissent, curtail diversity in academic thought, and weaken institutional independence.

Moreover, the claim that “more than 15,000 suggestions” have been received is a convenient shield. The government has offered no transparency on which suggestions were accepted, which were discarded, and what changes were made as a result. This is consultation in name only, not in spirit.

The 2025 draft regulations make this transformation disturbingly complete, even though the Lok Sabha reply praises the regulations for prioritising research and aligning with “global standards,” nowhere does it address the central issue that the UGC is no longer functioning as an independent academic regulator but as an extension of the political establishment. Then how can it ensure the praised “global standard”?

Far-Right Agenda Behind the Draft Regulations

The larger picture is deeply alarming. This is not merely another regulatory tweak but a calculated move in a broader, systematic campaign to weaponise education, transforming universities into factories of ideological conformity and reducing state governments to mute spectators in a domain where they once held constitutional authority.

The UGC’s draft regulations are draped in the technocratic jargon of “excellence” and “global standards,” but their real objective is unmistakable: to tighten the Centre’s grip on academic autonomy, erode federalism, and stealthily impose a Far-Right cultural vision on India’s education system.

This centralising move blatantly contradicts the National Education Policy 2020, which promised decentralisation and institutional flexibility. Instead of empowering universities, the government is exploiting the NEP’s rhetoric to mask its agenda, replacing scholarly independence with political loyalty, and pluralism with a homogenised, majoritarian narrative. From saffronised textbooks to the suppression of dissent on campuses, the pattern is clear, that education is being repurposed as a tool to manufacture a regressive, hyper-nationalist worldview.

India’s universities were meant to be laboratories of critical thought, not propaganda hubs for the ruling establishment. The relentless centralisation of power, from the politically orchestrated appointments of Vice-Chancellors to the sidelining of state voices, threatens to suffocate intellectual diversity.

If the government genuinely aspires to build world-class institutions, it must: Restore federal balance by respecting the state government’s role in higher education, depoliticise the UGC, and shield academic governance from ideological interference, ensure VCs are chosen for their scholarship, not their proximity to power, and publicly disclose stakeholder feedback and revisions to expose the drafting process to sunlight.

The stakes extend beyond education, this is about India’s civilisational character. By turning campuses into battlegrounds for ideological conquest, the Centre isn’t just undermining universities; it’s sabotaging the nation’s intellectual future.

Federalism isn’t a bureaucratic hurdle, it’s the bedrock of a pluralistic democracy. And academia must remain a sanctuary for free thought, not a playground for far-right social engineering. The choice is stark: Will the country’s education system uphold prolificness or obedience? The answer will define the soul of the nation.

The writer is Parliamentary Secretary to a Lok Sabha MP and an alumnus of the Faculty of Law, University of Delhi. The views expressed are personal.

Courtesy: Newsclick

The post Higher Education: How Centre is Undermining State Autonomy & Politicising UGC appeared first on SabrangIndia.

The Joint Forum for Movement on Education (JFME) has launched a petition to draw attention to the crisis engulfing the education sector amidst the Covid-19 pandemic. As the first coronavirus cases trickled in, India shut its schools and moved the education system online. However, this just highlighted the digital divide and the lack of infrastructure required for education to be accessed by all.

In this context, the JFME, which consists of constituent organizations like the All India Federation of University and College Teachers’ Organization and the All India Forum for Right to Education, among others, launched a petition addressing PM Modi. The petition stated, “The recently released ‘UGC Revised Guidelines on Examinations and Academic Calendar for the Universities in view of Covid-19 Pandemic’, propose illogical and un-academic solutions for evaluating and granting degrees to students.”

The UGC Revised Guidelines state “The universities are required to complete the Terminal Semester / Final Year Examinations (2019-20) by the end of September 2020 in offline (pen & paper)/ online/ blended (online + offline) mode following the prescribed protocols/ guidelines related to COVID-19 pandemic.”

Erroneous supposition by UGC

The petition states that the guidelines erroneously suppose two things. First – that the decision is taken on the premise of upholding the “principles of health, safety, fair and equal opportunity for students” and increasing their academic credibility and ensuring their future career progress. Second – that online exams could replicate assessments done through examinations in pen and paper mode and these are the best available alternatives in the current context.

Ground realities overlooked, state governments not consulted

The petition has therefore cited reasons on why UGC should withdraw these guidelines. Firstly, the diverse ground realities prevailing in different parts of the country and the concerns expressed by different State Governments and Universities are not acknowledged in the said Guidelines. It states, “The situation in many parts of the country is extremely critical. Recent floods in some parts of the country and consequent problems of electricity, etc. will also make it difficult for the conduct of examinations.”

The petition states that the UGC guidelines “ignore the fact that Education is on the concurrent list and State Governments ought to have a say in what is to be implemented. Not letting State Governments and Universities choose the method most appropriate to their conditions through their respective statutory processes and consultation with all stakeholders, therefore, amounts to a serious erosion of academic standards and institutional autonomy.”

It adds, “The one-size-fits-all approach cannot work because of the sheer diversity in the circumstances of different universities – their sizes and geographical spreads, socio-economic status of their students, whether they are unitary universities or have affiliated institutions, the relative importance of undergraduate and post-graduate courses, their disciplinary mix, their mediums of instruction and examination, etc.”

Safety of students compromised

The petition also states that given the increase of cases throughout the country, it would be near impossible for regular examinations to be conducted by September without the safety of the students being compromised. Given this situation, most would Universities would opt for online / blended mode of examination which cannot match up to the credibility of regular examinations.

Discriminatory

It also states, “The online / blended mode is discriminatory towards those without access to books, notes and online resources. Lack of stable internet connectivity, especially in the remote parts of the country, will put a large section of students at a huge disadvantage. Differently-abled students and those from the underprivileged sections of society will be the worst hit.”

Another point that the petition makes is that the online / blended mode of examination will not monitor the use of unfair means and will penalise those who are honest and promote malpractice. Given these problems, the JFME has suggested that other forms of “credible and meaningful assessment like internal / continuous assessment and / or average scores of past semesters would meet the criteria of fairness and integrity better.”

The JFME also strives to clarify the misconception that “cancellation of “final exams” in view of the pandemic would amount to not evaluating students or giving them an undervalued degree.” It says, “Intermediate students are to be evaluated and promoted based on the average of past semesters and the internal assessment of the current semester. Hence, there is no reason that such an alternative cannot be adopted for final semester / year students.”

Hence, given the current scenario in the country, the JFME has sought immediate intervention from the PM for the “immediate intervention for the withdrawal of the UGC Guidelines, the immediate cancellation of the mandatory requirement of examinations for final year students and for alternative forms to be adopted for grant of degrees.”

The change.org petition by JFME may be accessed here.

As many as 31 students in 13 states have now filed a plea in the Supreme seeking the cancellation of final year exams and that results be declared on past performance and internal assessment. The Court is set to hear the plea in the next two days.

Related:

Students with disabilities, those from underprivileged households and women left out of online learning during pandemic
E-learning is corporate driven; not the way to go during lockdown and after

The post Cancel mandatory university final exams: Joint Forum for Movement of Education appeared first on SabrangIndia.