decide whether it will or will not participate and also to determine the extent of its participation, consistent with its other basic objectives. But the university system as a whole must meet the challenge of the situation. For this purpose, a suitable machinery for consultations should be developed between the universities, the representatives of university interests such as the UGC and the IUB and the representatives of Government Departments, both at the Centre and in the States. In the working of this consultative machinery, procedures and conventions should be developed for reaching decisions regarding numbers to be trained, courses of study, and problems of applied research. The most important element in these conventions should be a common appreciation that every task to be undertaken by a university must be carried out at the standard necessary and that the capacity of the universities to teach and to do research is not diminished as a result of the decisions taken. if, for instance, in preparing high-level technical and medical personnel, the universities are asked to increase their enrolments suddenly without providing adequate facilities, it is not merely the universities that suffer but also the quality of the training which is essential for such personnel.

13.14 While instances of the type mentioned above indicate legitimate claims on the universities, there could be other claims or situations which involve an undesirable infringement of university autonomy. For instance, it would be wrong if universities were expected to owe allegiance to any particular political party, or individual, or attempted to further the interests of such parties or individuals. It is equally wrong, as people in power in public fife and even those within the academic community itself sometimes do, to influence appointments for teaching or research posts and to interfere with the admission of students in general or of particular students to particular courses. Similarly, it is not proper that State Governments should try to give 'directives' to universities in academic matters such as affiliation of colleges. We also feel unhappy at restrictions placed on some of the universities in the country and at some recent attempts to curtail their autonomy. For instance, the universities in Bihar do not have the authority to recruit their teachers-this is done by the Public Service Commission of the State. There may possibly be good reasons for this decision. All the same, we are strongly of the view that the machinery for the eradication of any deficiencies in a university should be built into the university system itself There have also been some other instances of the infringement on autonomy, although good sense has ultimately prevailed and led to their modification. For instance, an ordinance vesting the authority to recruit university teachers in the Public Service Commission of the State was issued some time ago by the Government of Madhya

13.15 THE GOVERNANCE OF UNIVERSITIES 603

Pradesh. Mention may also be made of the order issued by the Govern- ment of Uttar Pradesh defining the qualifications of teachers to be appointed in the Universities of Allahabad and Lucknow, or the recent amendments carried out to its University Acts by the Government of Andhra Pradesh. We are, however, happy to note that the need for effective university autonomy as fundamental to a proper functioning of the universities is, on the whole, widely recognized in the country. In recent years, adverse legislation or orders have been either suitably modified or abandoned in view of the expression of public opinion and the advice given by the Inter-University Board and the UGC. The general trend is in the direction of acknowledging the proper sphere of university freedom and autonomy. We would like to stress that one of the most important functions of the UGC is to support and strengthen the autonomy of the universities and this role will become all the more important, difficult and delicate, as public funds spent on university cities increase rapidly and inevitably in the years to come. The present serious difficulties of the UGC in the UK provide a pertinent and useful lesson for all countries which have a UGC-type of organization to pass on to the universities government funds but filter out government control.

13.15 In this connection we would like to draw attention to two important points:

(1) As in the case of liberty, the price of autonomy is eternal vigilance by all parties concerned. The universities are established by law and they can have only as much autonomy as the law permits. In the last analysis, therefore, the real custodian of university autonomy is public opinion based on a conviction that autonomous universities, which maintain intellectual integrity in their fearless pursuit of truth, are an indispensable bulwark of democracy and freedom. In creating a strong public opinion in this behalf, the UGC, the IUB and the intelligentsia, who are themselves mostly the alumni of the universities, have an important role to play.

(2) The universities should also realize that it would be unwise to expect that effective autonomy could descend as a 'gift' from above: it has to be continually earned and deserved. The universities derive their right to autonomy from their dedication to the pursuit and service of truth. Their capacity to resist any illegitimate claims on their autonomy, therefore, will be proportional to their effective performance of this duty and their willing acknowledgement of the legitimate claims on them of the nonacademic authorities. Moreover, as they discharge their intellectual and public obligations effectively and with integrity and

604 EDUCATION AND NATIONAL DEVELOPMENT 13.16

contribute to the economic and social progress of the country, they will earn the esteem of society and government and the chances of their being confronted with illegitimate claims and pressures from outside will be diminished. This is not an easy task, quick of achievement, but this is emphatically the line along which we should move.*161

UNIVERSITY FINANCES

13.16 University autonomy cannot become real and effective unless adequate provision is made to meet the financial requirements of universities and colleges. While the UGC has been established as an autonomous body to provide the necessary financial resources to the universities without governmental control or interference, State universities have to depend, for their maintenance grants and matching share, on the funds provided directly by the State Governments. This is an important source through which they can and sometimes do seek to curb the freedom of the universities. This is obviously undesirable. We recommend that the existing system of university finances should be reorganized on the basis of the following important principles:

-State Governments should deal with the universities with understanding and imagination and place adequate financial resources at their disposal to enable them to carry out their obligations in an efficient way. It would also be desirable if they seek the advice of the UGC in the matter.

-While some safeguards are inevitable in financial matters and reasonable economy in expenditure has to be ensured, it is essential to simplify rules and regulations and to operate them with speed and efficiency.

13.17 The Central universities obtain their grants-for maintenance as well as development-from the UGC. In their case, therefore, difficulties are reduced to the minimum and arise mainly from the made inadequacy of available funds rather than through procedural deficiencies. Several difficult problems have, however, arisen with regard to the State universities, and it is these that we propose to discuss in some detail.

13.18 UGC Grants to State Universities. The State universities obtain their development grants mainly through the UGC. Under the Bill

161* At the end of the chapter, we give the statement on University autonomy issued recently by the IUB. We fully agree with the views expressed therein.

13.21 THE GOVERNANCE OF UNIVERSITIES 605

now before Parliament, the UGC will also be authorized to give main- tenance grants to State universities in its discretion. We welcome this important reform.

13.19 At present, the UGC appoints visiting committees to assess the needs and requirements of the universities for developmental projects during a plan period and sanctions grants-in- aid on the basis of the recommendations made by the committees. This is a good procedure and should continue with certain modifications which we shall discuss a little later. There is room, in our opinion, for expediting the sanction of grants-there are sometimes considerable delays as, for instance, when the All India Council for Technical Education (AICTE) has to be consulted-and for modifying the procedures for the release of funds. But these are, on the whole, of a minor character and we trust that they will be looked into.

13.20 For some schemes, the UGC gives grants-in-aid to State universities on a 100 per cent basis. But a majority of the schemes of development require matching grants from the State Governments. These are not often received in time. There is also a tendency on the part of some States to earmark funds for the setting up of new colleges and even new universities rather than to strengthen the standards of existing institutions. In view of these difficulties, it is sometimes suggested that the UGC should give grants on a 100 per cent basis only and that, if necessary, it may even reduce the number of schemes to be assisted. We do not favour this proposal which would have the disadvantage of reducing the total resources available for the development of university education. It may also possibly result in some State Governments taking less interest in higher education which is one of their important concerns. We are, therefore, of the view that there should be some sharing of developmental expenditure on universities between the UGC and the State Governments. But, in view of the financial difficulties which are being experienced by the State Governments, we are of the opinion that the share expected of them should be reduced to the extent possible.

13.21 Difficulties have arisen in some universities because the State Governments are not prepared to provide for the committed expenditure arising out of the developmental programmes undertaken by them with assistance from the UGC. In some cases, the State Governments have argued that they were not consulted when the developmental programmes were originally undertaken and that they are, therefore, under no obligation to provide for the committed expenditure involved. These problems have to be solved at an early date in the interest of higher education. We, therefore, recommend that the UGC should take early steps to mediate in the matter and save these universities

606 EDUCATION AND NATIONAL DEVELOPMENT 13.22

from the embarrassment caused by the nonpayment of grants on committed expenditure by the State Governments.

13.22 Grants-in-Aid to the State Universities from State Governments. The State universities have to obtain grants from their State Governments for three purposes: (1) matching share on developmental grants given by the UGC; (2) non-plan grants for university development; and (3) grants for committed expenditure. The first of these is a small amount and we have recommended above that it may be reduced further. We trust that, in future, there will be no difficulty for the State Governments in making available promptly their matching share for development purposes.

13.23 The non-plan grant for university development as well as grants for committed expenditure, taken together, form a large amount and constitute the bulk of the total financial resources available to the universities. The existing procedures with regard to these grants are not satisfactory and because of them, most State universities are facing severe financial difficulties at present. With a view to making a closer study of the problem, the Commission addressed a questionnaire to all universities for information regarding the present systems of grant-in-aid and the difficulties encountered. The following are some of the main conclusions which have emerged from this study:

(1) There are two main systems of grant-in-aid from the State Governments to the universities: the deficit grant; and the block grant which may be statutory, ad hoc or based on the past expenditure (with or without an allowance for normal expansion).

(2) Under the system of deficit grants, the annual maintenance grant is given on the basis of the estimated approved expenditure minus the estimated approved income, subject to adjustment in subsequent years on the basis of actual income and actual expenditure as revealed by audited accounts. While this sounds unobjectionable on paper, it creates several problems in practice. For instance, the State Government may not convey the approval of its budget to the university in time. In fact, it is sometimes conveyed after six or seven months of the year have elapsed. Sometimes, sudden cuts are made in the budget which create serious difficulties for the university. Under such an arrangement, the university cannot create even a minor post or incur any recurring liability, however small, without the prior approval of the Government. The final adjustment of grants usually takes years to be completed.

(3) The system of block grant, on the whole, works better, although several problems arise in this method also. The two main ingre-

13.25 THE GOVERNANCE OF UNIVERSITIES 607

dients of a block grant are: (a) the basis on which its amount is fixed; and (b) the frequency of revision. With regard to the first, three methods are in vogue. in the first, the amount of the grant is fixed on the basis of past expenditure. The main difficulty in this method is that it does not allow even for the normal growth of expenditure in a university. The practice prevailing in some States of allowing a cushion or an automatic increase at a specified percentage in the block grant is more helpful. But even here difficulties arise when unforeseen decisions have to be taken (such as the revision of salaries or dearness allowance) during the period of the grant. With regard to the second, it is found that there are considerable variations in practice. When the amount of block grants is specified in the university Act itself and is made statutory, the system becomes inelastic, the grants remain fixed for years and the development of universities is retarded. The non-statutory block grants are revised sometimes triennially and sometimes quinquennially. But in a majority of cases, they remain unchanged for much longer periods.

13.24 For the smooth development of higher education it is essential to review these practices and to institute a better system of grant-in-aid. This must satisfy three essential conditions: first, it is necessary to ensure that the grant-giving authority does not exercise too much control and rigidity of approach, as a system of checks and balances-devised in other days for other purposes-is out of tune with the needs of a rapidly developing university administration and finance; secondly, the grant-receiving bodies have to exercise the utmost vigilance and economy in utilising public funds; thirdly, the system should be sufficiently elastic and should leave some scope to the universities to experiment with new ideas and projects. Thus a system of grant-in-aid has to be devised which would promote a free flow of funds from one authority to another and at the same time ensure economy, efficiency and allow for the necessary degree of flexibility.

13.25 In the light of these general principles, we recommend that the system of grant-in-aid from the State Governments to the uni- versities should be reorganized on the basis of a system of block grants providing for:

- fixation of a block grant for a short period, say 3 to 5 years, on a rolling basis;

- provision for inevitable increases of expenditure during the period of grant;

- payment of special grants during this period for unforeseen developments; and

608 EDUCATION AND NATIONAL DEVELOPMENT 13.26