The Future of Vice-Chancellor Appointments: UGC’s Draft Regulations and the Federal Divide

Context

The University Grants Commission (UGC) has proposed new rules for selecting Vice Chancellors (VCs) in Indian universities, which has led to disagreements between the Centre (central government) and state governments. The proposed changes aim to standardize the appointment process, but critics argue that these new regulations could weaken state autonomy and interfere with federalism in India. Here's an overview of the key provisions and the ongoing debates.

Key Provisions of the UGC Draft Regulations (2025)

1. Search-Cum-Selection Committee:

   • The committee for appointing VCs will have three members:
     • One nominated by the Chancellor/Visitor (often the Governor).
     • One nominated by the UGC Chairman.
     • One nominated by the university’s apex body (like the Senate or Syndicate).
   • Centre-aligned nominees will have more influence in the selection process, raising concerns about centralization.

2. Eligibility for Vice-Chancellor:

   • Candidates don’t need to be professors anymore. Now, individuals with 10 years of senior experience in areas like public policy, industry, or public administration can also apply, as long as they have contributed to academics in some way.
   • This opens up the position to more people but moves away from the tradition of choosing distinguished academicians.

3. Chancellor's Role in the Process:

   • The Chancellor (often the Governor) will now have the final say in constituting the search committee. This centralizes control, which many state governments find problematic.

4. Transparency in Selection:

   • The process will be more transparent, with advertisements in national newspapers and public notifications.
   • Applications will either be nominated or submitted through the search process led by the committee.

5. VC Appointment Terms:

   • VCs will serve a five-year term, or until they turn 70, whichever comes first.
   • VCs can be reappointed for one more term after completing their initial tenure.

Disputes Between States and the Centre

1. Kerala:

   • The conflict started in 2021 when the Governor opposed certain VC reappointments.
   • The state passed a Bill to replace the Governor with the Chief Minister as Chancellor, which is awaiting approval.

2. West Bengal:

   • Disagreements arose over the Governor's unilateral VC appointments. The state’s plan to replace the Governor with the Chief Minister as Chancellor has stalled.

3. Karnataka:

   • The state is pushing to remove the Governor from the role of Chancellor, with related bills waiting approval.

4. Maharashtra:

   • In 2022, the state government reversed its earlier attempts to limit the Governor's role in VC appointments.

5. Tamil Nadu:

   • The state is facing obstacles in appointing VCs without Governor approval, which has been blocked by the Centre.

Federalism Concerns Over VC Appointments

State governments are concerned that the new regulations take away power from them and put it in the hands of the Centre. They argue that:

• States are losing control over education, which traditionally falls under their jurisdiction.
• The regulations undermine state autonomy and the rights of democratically elected state governments.

Reactions from State Leaders

• Kerala CM Pinarayi Vijayan called the proposal “anti-federal” and an infringement on state rights.
• Tamil Nadu CM M K Stalin called it a “direct assault on federalism”.

UGC’s Justification

UGC Chairman M Jagadesh Kumar defended the regulations, saying they are needed to align with the National Education Policy 2020, which aims to ensure quality and transparency in leadership across higher education institutions.

Detailed Guidelines on VC Appointments

1. Search-Cum-Selection Committee:

   • The committee for selecting the VC will be mandatory for all universities (Central, Provincial, or State-based).
   • The Chancellor (often the Governor) will directly form the committee, which will consist of three experts nominated by the Chancellor, the UGC, and the university's apex body.

2. Governor’s Increased Role:

   • The Governor, acting as Chancellor in most states, will continue to have significant power in the selection process, although the regulations don’t explicitly mention the Governor.

3. Expanded Eligibility:

   • The eligibility criteria for VC appointments have expanded. Now, candidates can come from diverse backgrounds, including industry, public policy, and public administration, as long as they have contributed to academics in some way.

4. Transparency in the Selection Process:

   • There will be advertisements in newspapers and public notifications to ensure transparency.
   • The selection process can involve nominations or a formal search process conducted by the committee.

5. VC Appointment Terms:

   • VCs will serve a five-year term, or until they turn 70, whichever is earlier.
   • VCs can be reappointed for one more term.

6. Consequences of Non-Compliance:

   • Universities that don’t follow these guidelines could face consequences, such as losing eligibility to offer degrees or being removed from the list of Higher Educational Institutions (HEIs).

Conclusion

The UGC’s proposed regulations have sparked significant tension between the Centre and state governments. While the Centre defends these changes as necessary to improve transparency and quality in higher education, state governments view them as an infringement on their rights and an attack on federalism. The outcome of this debate will likely have a lasting impact on the governance of higher education in India, as well as the relationship between the Centre and the states.