Dear Ms. Smriti Irani:
Your last election manifesto, before the 2014 general elections, had this laudable point - "will provide autonomy with steps to ensure accountability for institutions of higher learning". We had high hopes that the attempts over the past 15 years to tamper with the autonomy of our premier institutes would come to an end.
The IIMs have historically been given more autonomy than many Indian institutions, and they have handled this freedom with a great deal of care. The IIMs have held these values dear, and this autonomy has in turn played a great role in them being institutes of global renown, nurturing managers and educational leaders for close to five decades.
However after a review of the
draft IIM Bill that your ministry has put out, we feel there are many Sections of the Bill which completely undermine the role of the Board and the Faculty Council that governs each IIM.
Some examples:
1) Sec. 11 on Board appointments - Chairperson, Director & 2 nominees - all appointed by the Central Govt., 1 nominee appointed by the State Govt., 2 Faculty reps selected by the Chairperson who in turn is appointed by the Central Govt., "Independent" members to be appointed by the Board which in turn now has been appointed by the Central Govt. -
getting tired of typing the word govt. here.2) Section 12 (2) (i) stipulates that the cadre & pay scales of the faculty & staff can be determined only by the Central Government.
Then we wonder why we can't get the best-calibre people to join our government companies and colleges.3) Sec. 21 (1) - it gets downright scary now - "Without prejudice to the foregoing provisions of this Act, the Institute shall, for the efficient administration of this Act, be bound by such directions on questions of policy, as the Central Government may give in writing to it from time to time".
This is a catch-all clause - just in case the rest of the bill did not burn your rights, this one will. And Sec. 21 (2) seem to just rub it in, for added pleasure - 'The decision of the Central Government whether a question is one of policy or not, shall be final.'
4) Sec. 30 and Sec. 31 on Coordination Forum - a 37-member Coordination Forum with no clear objectives - a shining exemplar of bureaucratic overkill.
With more IIMs underway, this will soon hit the half-century mark.5) Section 35 grants power to the Central Government to make rules that supersede the Board.
6) Section 36 grants rights to the Board to make regulations, but only with the approval of the Central Government, on all important and unimportant aspects ranging from fees, admission criteria, staff strength to building maintenance and hostel conditions.
Another just-in-case clause - just in case, by any teeny weeny chance the government missed out any opportunity to kill any life in the IIMs, this one will.The government has a host of bigger priorities to handle in the field of primary and secondary education. To waste its bandwidth in matters of higher education is a case of misplaced priorities by people who appear to feel that academics can be governed by diktat.
All these clauses will undermine the credibility of the IIMs and we don't want the IIMs to go down the path of government-run airlines (Air India - nightmare!) and PSU banks. We urge you to have wider and in-person discussions with all the important stakeholders, including the faculty, alumni & industry leaders in bringing about the requisite changes to the IIM Bill to truly empower the IIMs.
If it ain't broke, don't fix it.
Thanks!
(Vamshidhar Guthikonda, Srikanth Narasimhan and a bunch of IIM Alumni who wanted to become distinguished but have ended up becoming anguished.)
Disclaimer: The opinions expressed within this article are the personal opinions of the author. The facts and opinions appearing in the article do not reflect the views of NDTV and NDTV does not assume any responsibility or liability for the same.