Opposition States Demand Rollback of UGC Draft Rules Over NEP Compliance
Six opposition-ruled states have strongly opposed the University Grants Commission (UGC) draft regulations for 2025, demanding an immediate rollback. The regulations, aimed at aligning with the National Education Policy (NEP) 2020, have been criticized for curtailing state autonomy and introducing provisions that allegedly undermine higher education quality and federal principles.
State Ministers Reject UGC’s New Guidelines
The State Higher Education Ministers Conclave, hosted in Bengaluru by Karnataka minister M C Sudhakar, saw participation from ministers or representatives from Karnataka, Telangana, Kerala, Tamil Nadu, Himachal Pradesh, and Jharkhand. They collectively adopted a 15-point resolution, denouncing the draft regulations as “draconian” and calling for a consultative approach before implementing any major changes.
Congress leader Jairam Ramesh asserted that the justification of these regulations under NEP 2020 does not withstand scrutiny and demanded an immediate rollback. He emphasized that higher education reforms should not override constitutional federalism.
Key Concerns Raised by the Opposition States
1. State Role in Vice Chancellor Appointments
- The draft UGC rules exclude state governments from the appointment process of vice chancellors in public universities.
- Ministers argued that this move infringes on state rights and violates the federal structure.
- They demanded state participation in search-cum-selection committees for vice chancellor appointments.
2. Changes in Faculty Appointments and Evaluation
- Removal of the Academic Performance Indicator (API) evaluation system has been criticized for introducing excessive discretion in faculty promotions.
- The draft allows non-academics to be appointed as vice chancellors, a provision states have urged to withdraw.
- Concerns were raised over assistant professor eligibility criteria, particularly the non-requirement of a basic degree in the relevant subject.
3. Imposition of NEP Provisions and Loss of Autonomy
- The regulations impose NEP recommendations as mandatory, with punitive measures for non-compliance.
- Opposition leaders called this approach dictatorial, arguing it violates institutional autonomy.
- Grading parameters and policies favor private institutions over public universities, raising concerns about inequality in higher education.
4. Impact on Student Access and Inclusive Education
- Making an entrance exam mandatory for undergraduate admissions creates a barrier to inclusive education.
- Provisions for biannual exams, dual degrees, and multiple entry-exit options need further deliberation before implementation.
Call for a Consultative Approach
The opposition states have urged the UGC to engage in a collaborative and consultative process with state governments before finalizing the draft regulations. They emphasized that federalism and higher education autonomy must be preserved, rather than overridden by centralized policymaking.
The demand for an immediate rollback of the UGC draft regulations underscores the growing tensions between the Centre and opposition-ruled states over the implementation of NEP 2020.
