REPORT OF THE CABE COMMITTEE ON GNANAM COMMITTEE REPORT, 1992

 REPORT OF THE CABE COMMITTEE ON
 GNANAM COMMITTEE REPORT

April 1992

DRAFT FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY NOT FOR CIRCULATION

Minister of Education Dr. Karshandas Soneri Government of Gujarat Sachivalaya, GANDHINAGAR.

April 24, 1992

Dear Shri Arjun Singhji,

It gives me great pleasure to present the Report of the Committee appointed by you, in your capacity as Chairman of CABE, to examine the report of the UGC Committee on 'Alternate Models of Management' under the Chairmanship of Prof. A. Gnanam. The Committee had detailed and wide ranging discussions on each recommendation of the Gnanam Committee report, and although at times the discussions were heated and strong positions were taken, ultimately we could arrive at a consensus on all major issues. The Committee has consistently taken the view that while the universities 'Must have complete autonomy in all academic matters and in their day-to-day governance, both UGC and Government have a definitive role to play in ensuring even spread of higher education in all parts of the country and in maintaining the highest academic standards. Universities are almost entirely financed from public funds and they have to observe norms of public expenditure. We have also emphasised the urgent need for decentralisation of management -

academic, financial and administrative - within the universities and for greater accountability of teachers and university officials towards students, parents and the society. The Committee was firmly of the view that politicisation of our campuses should be discouraged.

The Committee was asked to suggest modalities for implementation of the recommendations of the Gnanam Committee Report and also to recommend policy guidelines for starting new Central Universities. We were of the view that there should be a systematic plan for implementation and monitoring of the recommendations of the Gnanam Committee at various levels in Government, Universities and Colleges. As regards starting of new Central Universities or converting existing State Universities to Central Universities, the Committee is of the view that university education has been made available in almost all parts of the country and our efforts should be to improve the quality of existing institutions. New Central Universities could be justified only to provide educational facilities in remote or backward areas where benefits of higher education have so far not been extended.

Although I have been associated with higher education for many years, I have personally learnt a lot about the system of higher education during the discussions of the Committee. The learned Members of the Committee, with their rich and varied experience, provided different perspectives on various issues which enabled the Committee to make recommendations which should be acceptable not only to the academic community but also to Government and educational administrators. I am grateful to all Members for their help and co- operation.

Yours sincerely,

(Karshandas Soneri) Shri Arjun Singh, Minister of Human Resource Development, Government of India, Shastri Bhavan, NEW DELHI-110001.

REPORT OF THE CABE COMMITTEE ON GNANAM COMMITTEE REPORT

The Central Advisory Board of Education (CABE) in its 46th Meeting held on March 8-9, 1991 considered the report' of the UGC Committee on 'Alternate Models of Management' under the Chairmanship of Prof. A. Gnanam. The CABE decided that the Chairman, CABE set up a CABE Committee to consider the recommendations of the Gnanam Committee keeping in view the comments of the State Governments, and have the report of the Committee placed before the CABE at the next meeting.

2. Minister (Human Resource Development), in his capacity as Chairman of CABE, constituted a Committee under the Chairmanship of Dr. Karshandas Soneri, Minister of Education, Gujarat, by Department of Education Order No.F.3-9/91-PN. I dated December 9, 1991 with the following terms of reference:-

(i) to consider the recommendations of the Gnanam Committee taking into account the views of the State Governments, the University Grants Commission and in the light of the National Policy on Education, 1986 and other developments since the formulation of the Policy.

(ii) To suggest for consideration of CABE the modalities for implementation of the recommendations.

(iii) To recommend policy guidelines for starting new Central Universities and for conversion of existing State Universities into Central Universities.

A copy of Department of Education Order No.F.3-9/91-PN. I dated December 9, 1991 is at Annex.I. Two more members were added to the Committee by Department of Education Order of even number dated February 18, 1992 Annex. II.

3. The Committee held its first meeting on January 20-21, 1992 at New Delhi. Subsequent meetings were held on February 22 and March 21, 1992 also at New Delhi.

4. The Committee has gone through carefully each recommendation of the Gnanam Committee, and considered the views of University Grants Commission and seven State Governments/Union Territory Administrations who had sent their written comments on the report of the Gnanam Committee to Department of Education. The recommendations were examined in the light of the National Policy on Education, 1986 and developments in the field of

higher education since the formulation of the Policy. The Committee took cognizance of the recommendations of the Review Committee on National Policy on Education (Acharya Ramamurthy Committee) and was apprised of the discussions in the CABE Committee appointed under the Chairmanship of Chief Minister of Andhra Pradesh to consider the report of the Ramamurthy Committee.

5. After detailed discussions, the Committee have formulated their views on the recommendations of the Report of the Gnanam Committee. The views of the Committee are given in a tabular statement at Annex. III. The Committee felt that in order to recognise the role of women in the management of higher education, wherever the word 'He' has been used in the Report of the Gnanam Committee, it should be taken to include 'She' also. Out of 144 recommendations made by Gnanam Committee, this Committee has accepted 67, not accepted 10, and accepted 67 recommendations with some modification.

6. The second term of reference required the Committee to suggest modalities for implementation of the recommendations. The Committee observed that the system has suffered because many good recommendations made earlier by various Commissions and Committees have remained

unimplemented. The Committee was of the view that if the Gnanam Committee Report has to result in appreciable improvement in the management patterns of our Universities, then there should be a systematic plan for the implementation of these recommendations at various levels. The Committee observed that the Report of the Gnanam Committee, along with the views of this Committee would be placed before the CABE which consists of Education Ministers of all States and eminent educationists. If CABE approves the Report, then the Centre and the State Governments would be morally committed to implement its recommendations.

7. Several agencies would be concerned with the implementation of the recommendations of the Gnanam Committee. These would include - Central Government, UGC, State Governments, Universities and Colleges. The Committee was of the view that UGC should prepare a statement indicating which recommendations are to be implemented by which agency and this statement should be circulated to all the concerned agencies after the Gnanam Committee Report has been considered by the CABE.

8. The Committee recommends that the implementation of the recommendations of the Gnanam Committee should be monitored at all levels.

For this purpose, Committees should be set up at the levels of Central Government/UGC, State Governments/State Councils of Higher Education, Universities and Colleges. The, Committees should consist of academics, and Government and University officers responsible for the implementation of Gnanam Committee recommendations, and should also have outside experts. The composition of the Committees could be suggested by UGC. The Committees should meet regularly and monitor implementation of recommendations against a pre-determined time and activities schedule.

9. The Committee recommends that CABE should set up a Standing Committee to monitor progress of implementation of recommendations of Gnanam Committee at all levels. This Committee :could consist of three Ministers, Chairman UGC, President AIU, Union Education Secretary, two Education Secretaries of States, two Vice-Chancellors and two eminent educationists from the field of higher education. The CABE Committee should meet once in six months and present its report on the implementation of the Gnanam Committee recommendations to the CABE Committee at its next meeting.

10. The third term of reference for this Committee is to recommend policy guidelines for starting new Central Universities and for conversion

of existing State Universities into Central Universities.

11. The Committee was informed that there are at present 146 Universities in the country, of which only 10 are Central Universities. The policy of the Central Government has been that State Governments should themselves set up universities keeping in view the requirements of higher education in their States. As a matter of policy, Central Government has not favoured opening of new Central Universities. Even the existing ten Central Universities were set up in response to certain historical, cultural or considerations of Centre-State relations. For example, Banaras Hindu University (1916), Aligarh Muslim University (1920) and Delhi University (1922) were included in the Union List in the Government of India Act, 1935 and have thus remained Central Universities. Visva-Bharati, founded by Rabindranath Tagore, was declared an Institution of National Importance and constituted as a Central University in 1951. North Eastern Hill University (NEHU) was established in 1973 keeping in view the educational requirements of North Eastern States, and University of Hyderabad was established in 1974 in the wake of an agitation in a State.

12. In 1976, with the 42nd Amendment, Education was transferred to the Concurrent List. With this Amendment, it became possible for the Central

Government to establish universities in any part of the country. However, Central Government has so far used these powers very sparingly. Pondicherry University and Indira Gandhi National Open University were established in 1985 and Jamia Millia Islamia, a deemed university, was given the status of Central University in 1989 in view of the unique genesis of the Jamia and its contribution to the freedom struggle. Legislation has been enacted to establish Central Universities in Assam and Nagaland in response to the persistent demands for institutions of higher education from the people of these States.

13.1 The Committee was also informed that demands have been made during the last several years by State Governments, Universities and others for either setting up of new Central Universities or for conferring Central University status on the existing State Universities. In recent years, requests for establishment of new Central Universities have been received from Governments of Orissa, Madhya Pradesh, Andhra Pradesh, Kerala, Tamil Nadu, etc. The demands for conversion of existing State Universities into Central Universities have also been received, in particular, in respect of Allahabad University, Dr. B.R. Ambedkar University at Lucknow, Utkal University, Patna University, Tripura University, Manipur University, University of Rajasthan, etc. The

Central Government has so far considered it inadvisable, due to a number of reasons, to establish new Central Universities or to convert State Universities into Central Universities and there has been no instance where the latter' demand has been acceded to.

13.2 As pointed out by Central Universities Review Committee (1984), the Central Universities should seek to supplement, and not duplicate, the facilities and achievements of State Universities. The role of Central Universities is to function effectively on an all- India basis, as reflected in admissions, appointments and nature of teaching and research programmes, and to help in building a corporate intellectual life in the country and further national integration.

13.3 Central Government does not generally favour setting up of new Central Universities, as it expects the State Governments themselves to take steps for improvement of standards of their Universities. Conversion of one State University to a Central University would lead to demands for such conversions in several States, leading to imbalances in them system of higher education.

13.4 There has always been grave constraints on financial resources in the

Central budget and UGC has not been able to fully discharge its responsibilities due to this reason. Increase in the number of Central Universities would further reduce the resources available for existing Central Universities and affect their development.

13.5 The recruitment and promotion policies of many State Universities have been influenced by local and community consideration, and their functioning impaired by socio-political factionalism. Take over of such Universities by the Central Government may not necessarily improve the situation and it may become difficult for them to play the role which they are expected to do.

13.6 Over the years, the university system has had an unbridled expansion and standards have deteriorated. The NPE-1986 had expressed concern about this degradation and had called for measures to arrest it. The NPE Review Committee has also recommended that the Central Government should not establish more Central Universities without genuine justification for the same.

14.1 The Committee took note of the existing policy with regard to opening of new Central Universities and conversion of existing Universities into Central

Universities and generally endorsed the policy. The Committee was firmly of the view that new Central Universities should not be started under threats of agitation. The Committee made the following suggestions for opening of new Central Universities and conversion of State Universities into Central Universities:

14.2 A new University should be started only where there is a well established educational need for such a university. No new Central University should be started unless its need has been established on the basis of an educational survey and the proposal has been supported by UGC.

14.3 A Central University should not be started merely to satisfy the demand of each State that it should have a Central University.

14.4 It is the responsibility of the Centre to ensure that there is balanced growth of higher education in all parts of the country. A Central University should be opened only to correct regional imbalance or to cover large gaps in the educational map of the country. The Committee felt that the Centre would be justified in opening a Central University to provide for the educational needs of tribal population which at present may not be served, by any university.

14.5 A Central University should have all-India character in terms of admission of students and composition of teaching faculty. Admission and recruitment should be on the basis of all-India tests. Central Universities should offer innovative programmes which promote national integration and are relevant to the development needs of the country, and Central Universities should set high academic standards and act as a model for other Universities.

14.6 The demand of State Governments for Central Universities is mainly because of shortage of funds with State Governments and comparatively better funding provided by UGC to Central Universities. Instead of opening new Central Universities or converting existing Universities to Central Universities the Commission should provide special assistance to at least one good University in each State and try to develop it and bring it on par with a Central University in terms of academic and physical infrastructure and level of education. The Commission may formulate criteria for selecting such Universities and the conditions for intensive development funding, including changes in the management structure of the University in consultation the concerned State Government. Continuation of such additional funding should be linked with the performance of the University.