(Source – The Hindu, International Edition – Page No. – 8)
Topic : GS2 – Governance
Context
- The University Grants Commission (UGC) has proposed a draft regulation on the selection and appointment of vice chancellors (VCs) of universities.
- Non-BJP-led State governments oppose the regulation, claiming it violates the federal principles of the Constitution.
Proposed Amendment by UGC
- The amendment seeks to revise Regulation 2010 regarding VC appointments by broadening the eligibility criteria.
- Previously, only academicians with a minimum of 10 years of experience as professors were eligible.
- The new proposal includes professionals with 10 or more years of experience in industry, public administration, or public policy.
Objective of the UGC Act, 1956
The UGC Act was enacted to coordinate and determine standards in universities.The UGC promotes university education and maintains standards of teaching, research, and examinations.The Act allows the UGC to:Allocate funds for the maintenance and development of universities.Recommend measures for improving education.Advise governments on grants to universities.Collect and share information related to university education.
Role and Limits of UGC
- Section 26 of the UGC Act allows the UGC to make regulations, but these must align with the Act’s objectives.
- The Act does not cover the selection or appointment of VCs, as these are determined by laws passed by respective legislatures.
- The selection and appointment of VCs do not directly impact the maintenance of educational standards, as confirmed by the Bombay High Court in Suresh Patilkhede vs The Chancellor Universities of Maharashtra and Others (2011).
- Therefore, the UGC’s regulation on VC appointments may exceed its authority and could be declared invalid.
Regulations vs. State Laws
- A significant constitutional question arises: Can UGC regulations override State laws?
- The Bombay High Court ruled that UGC regulations cannot override State laws since they are subordinate legislation.
- However, the Supreme Court in Kalyani Mathivanan vs K.V. Jeyaraj and Ors (2015) held that UGC regulations have binding authority over universities.
- The Supreme Court stated that parliamentary approval is necessary for regulations to be effective, but this interpretation of parliamentary procedure has been questioned.
Resolution Through Constitutional Provisions
- Article 254 of the Constitution addresses conflicts between State and central laws.
- Only central laws (passed by Parliament and assented to by the President) can override State laws.
- UGC regulations, as subordinate legislation, do not qualify as central laws under this Article.
Conclusion
- The UGC’s draft regulation exceeds its mandate under the UGC Act, raising constitutional concerns.
- It highlights the need for a balanced approach respecting federal principles and State autonomy.