India News

Save the university

Published

9 years ago

April 25, 2017

[vc_row][vc_column][vc_column_text]UGC’s decision to drastically cut the number of seats in MPhil and PhD courses will deplete JNU’s research base and affect education and society in ways policy-makers cannot at present contemplate

By Meha Mathur

Even as the Kanhaiya Kumar issue was cooling off within the JNU campus, the premier central university of the country was hit by a regulation that it will find difficult to circumvent. The new, strict UGC guideline will result in a drastic reduction in the number of MPhil and PhD seats in various streams.

The guideline of July 2016 stipulates that no professor can be a guide to more than three MPhil and eight PhD students at any point of time. This means that admissions to the forthcoming batch will depend on how many students are already enrolled under various professors—research work taking as many as five or six years. Then, there are programmes in which there can be no admission this year.

Here’s an overview of seat reduction in various schools, for which JNU is famed:

School of Social Sciences: 232 (present strength 330)
School of International Studies: 141 (present strength 232)
School of Language, Literature and Culture Studies: 73 (present strength 227)
No admission in MPhil and PhD this year at the Centre for Media Studies, Centre for African Studies, Centre for East African Studies, Centre for Indo-Pacific Studies, Centre for the Study of Discrimination and Exclusion

On the face of it, the UGC move to bring down the student-teacher ratio at research level seems very rational. After all, when international rankings of educational institutions are released, the student-teacher ratio and quality of teaching are important criteria, and cramped classrooms can’t aspire to figure on these lists. “No Indian institute among top 200 world universities, experts worried”, read a Hindustan Times headline in September 2016 when the Times Global rankings were released.

Excellence vs inclusivity

But then, there is more to it than meets the eye. Academics from JNU and Delhi University have voiced concerns at the long-term harm it will cause. The first issue that comes to mind is its impact on inclusivity. JNU is one of the few universities offering quality higher education and research opportunities at affordable cost. By limiting the number of seats, the government is shutting the door of opportunity on the poor.

Posters and graffiti in JNU

Ajay Gudavarthy, associate professor of political science at JNU, says the move has been inspired by the aim of maintaining parity with global universities, but it can’t be feasible in a country of India’s size, where aspirations of people are now high. “The logic is fine, but you don’t have too many universities like JNU which can fulfil those aspirations of poor. This move will close opportunities for the disadvantaged youth of India.”

Ayesha Kidwai, professor at Centre of Linguistics in JNU, says this will push higher education out of the reach of poor. “So many youngsters come to JNU because they can avail of the opportunity by paying the same fee as the rich. Now, a good, affirmative action has been ended through this regulation. Instead of spreading such models of education, we are shrinking these options.”

Depleting research base

Then again, if you reduce the number of research scholars, who will teach at the level of higher education?

In a UGC report of 2008 titled “Higher Education in India: Issues Related to Expansion, Inclusiveness, Quality and Finance”, the then UGC chairman S Thorat had written about the then 11th Five Year Plan: “The 11th Plan recognised that the availability of adequate and qualified faculty is a pre-requisite for quality education. It also recognised that due to restrictions on the recruitment of the faculty in the state universities and colleges in 1980’s and 1990’s by various states, we faced serious problems related to the availability of faculty.” It seems that wisdom has again been lost on the policy makers.

Kidwai says that the national enrolment for PhDs is 0.5 percent. In all central universities it’s 3.2 percent, whereas in JNU it’s 62.5 percent. Now, this will come down to 15 to 20 percent. “Do you want MAs to teach in colleges?” she asks.

Abha Dev Habib, who teaches at Miranda House, Delhi University, says that for all the complaints that the research output is not good, we are reducing public money in education and the research grants have been constantly decreasing since 2013. The number of research proposals that have received grants has also come down and many institutions are feeling the pinch. Teachers in higher education are seen as a financial liability, because once they are recruited, they will have to be promoted, too. It’s clear, therefore, that all means are being adopted to dissuade research and recruitment in public institutions of higher learning.

The logical extension of this is that private universities will get more and more room to operate in research space, too. But as Gudavarthy points out, it will leave the poor out of the ambit of research. “About 50 percent of the students we have are poor. They will have to go back.” They might have to compromise on their dreams by joining second-rung universities, because private universities are outside their means.

What are the options?

Despite the Delhi High Court having already dismissed a petition from students for a stay on the UGC strictures on certain technical grounds, Siddiqui says the academics will not give in and that they will seek further legal recourse. But with the admission season already commencing, the future of at least the current batch of admission-seekers stands jeopardised.

The question that needs to be addressed in the long run is, what alternative does the government intend to provide to those who stand to lose? Are other universities on the anvil, offering research facilities on a par with JNU? Or does the government want to wean away youth from research and have them take up vocational and job-oriented courses only?

Move smacks of anti-intellectualism

Another dimension of the limit imposed on research students is the issue of politicisation. Abha Dev Habib puts it bluntly when she says that the government is disturbed by social movements. She says that JNU has a large number of research students who spend much more time on the campus than MA students, and there are more chances of their getting politicised. The government wants to minimise those chances. Kidwai agrees, saying this move smacks of “anti-intellectualism”.

The seat reduction has hit international studies and social sciences—disciplines associated with asking questions and with reasoning, in particular. Gudavarthy adds: “They don’t want a critical society. The focus is more on technology and vocational education. We will have a dearth of public intellectuals that way.”

Perhaps the move is also part of the shift away from research culture. After all, the Prime Minister has already set the agenda with “Harvard vs hard work”. There’s nothing wrong in having people respect vocational professions. But it takes all kinds of people to make this world. Pushing the pendulum to the other extreme will be counterproductive.

At this juncture, the questions need to be answered by policy-makers.

Photos by Anil Shakya and Meha Mathur[/vc_column_text][/vc_column][/vc_row]

Related Topics:JNU MPhil PhD Policy Research Seats UGC

Up Next

Gandhi vs Jinnah

Don't Miss

Maoists attack on CRPF jawans in Sukma,Chhattisgarh

India News

Actor Imran Khan asked to leave India after CJP protest

Actor Imran Khan has been asked to leave India by October 28, days after participating in a protest called by the Cockroach Janta Party (CJP) in Mumbai.

Published

49 mins ago

October 15, 2026

APNLive Desk

Actor Imran Khan, nephew of Bollywood star Aamir Khan, has been asked to leave India by the Mumbai Police, days after participating in a protest organised by the Cockroach Janta Party (CJP) in Mumbai.

According to the notice, the actor has been given until October 28 to leave the country. The development follows his participation in the demonstration, which brought the actor into the spotlight over his involvement in a political protest.

Imran Khan is believed to hold US citizenship and an Overseas Citizen of India (OCI) card rather than full Indian citizenship, according to the report.

What led to the notice against Imran Khan?

The notice came days after Imran Khan joined a protest called by the CJP in Mumbai. The group, described as a satirical political organisation, had called for the demonstration.

The actor’s participation was followed by action from the authorities, with the Mumbai Police directing him to leave India by the specified deadline.

The notice does not, by itself, mean that the actor has already left the country or has been deported. October 28 is the deadline mentioned for his departure.

Imran Khan and his citizenship status

Imran Khan is known for his work in Hindi films, including Jaane Tu… Ya Jaane Na and Delhi Belly. He is also the nephew of actor Aamir Khan.

The report states that Imran Khan is believed to be a US citizen and hold an OCI card. OCI status does not confer Indian citizenship, although it provides eligible foreign citizens of Indian origin with specified privileges under Indian law.

The notice directing the actor to leave India follows his participation in the Mumbai protest. The reported development has brought attention to the intersection of immigration rules and the participation of foreign nationals in political demonstrations.

India News

Election Commission orders voter roll revision in 17 states, UTs

The Election Commission has ordered a Special Summary Revision of electoral rolls in 17 states and Union Territories. Draft rolls are scheduled for November 12, with final rolls due on January 4, 2027.

Published

1 hour ago

October 15, 2026

APNLive Desk

The Election Commission of India (ECI) has ordered a Special Summary Revision (SSR) of electoral rolls in 17 states and Union Territories, with the exercise aimed at facilitating voter registration and including eligible electors who may have been left out during the Special Intensive Revision (SIR).

The order was issued on Thursday, October 15, amid continuing political controversy over the SIR process and concerns raised by opposition parties regarding the exclusion of names from electoral rolls.

Under the announced schedule, January 1, 2027, will be the qualifying date for the revision. The draft electoral rolls are scheduled to be published on November 12, while the final rolls are due on January 4, 2027. Uttar Pradesh and Punjab, two states included in the exercise, are scheduled to go to the polls by February 2027.

Which states and Union Territories are covered?

The Special Summary Revision will cover the following 17 states and Union Territories:

Andaman and Nicobar Islands
Assam
Bihar
Chhattisgarh
Goa
Gujarat
Kerala
Lakshadweep
Madhya Pradesh
Manipur
Puducherry
Punjab
Rajasthan
Tamil Nadu
Uttar Pradesh
Uttarakhand
West Bengal

The Election Commission’s order follows earlier instructions issued to state election officials on September 29 to undertake a special drive to enrol eligible voters who had been left out, along with young and first-time electors.

Why has the Election Commission ordered the revision?

The announcement comes amid protests and political disagreements over the Special Intensive Revision of electoral rolls. Opposition parties have raised concerns about names being excluded during the exercise.

Another point of contention has been an additional declaration required from applicants submitting Form 6 for voter enrolment while the SIR was underway. The declaration required applicants to map their parents to the last SIR, which was conducted around 20 years ago.

The Election Commission had clarified on October 7 that the additional declaration applied only in states and Union Territories where the SIR was being conducted. It said the regular forms prescribed under the Registration of Electors Rules, 1960, would apply outside the SIR period.

The latest SSR order refers to applications for inclusion through Form 6 but does not mention the additional declaration.

What happens in states not covered by the current schedule?

The Election Commission has said that the schedule for the Special Summary Revision will be announced later in states and Union Territories where the SIR is ongoing or has recently been completed.

These include Andhra Pradesh, Arunachal Pradesh, Chandigarh, Dadra and Nagar Haveli, Daman and Diu, Haryana, Jharkhand, Karnataka, Maharashtra, Meghalaya, Mizoram, Nagaland, the National Capital Territory of Delhi, Odisha, Sikkim, Tripura and Telangana.

For Himachal Pradesh, Jammu and Kashmir, and Ladakh, where the SIR has not yet started, the schedule for electoral roll revision will be announced in due course, taking local weather conditions into account.

The Election Commission’s latest order sets out a separate timeline for the 17 states and Union Territories covered by the current SSR exercise, while leaving the schedules for the other regions to be announced later.

India News

India-US trade deal first phase finalised, drafting underway

The first phase of the India-US trade agreement has been finalised and is undergoing legal drafting, Commerce Minister Piyush Goyal said. The deal is expected to be operationalised once India secures a competitive advantage over peer countries.

Published

3 hours ago

October 15, 2026

APNLive Desk

The first phase of the proposed India-US trade agreement has been finalised and is undergoing legal drafting, Commerce and Industry Minister Piyush Goyal said on Thursday. However, the agreement is yet to be fully finalised and implemented, with India seeking a competitive advantage over other countries before putting it into operation.

Speaking at the SRCC Centenary Conclave in New Delhi, Goyal said the first tranche of the bilateral agreement had been finalised and was going through the legal drafting process. He expressed hope that the process would be completed soon.

The minister said implementation would follow once India secured a comparable or competitive advantage over its peer countries in the American market.

India seeks an advantage over competing exporters

India wants its exporters to receive favourable market access and tariff terms compared with competitors. Goyal’s remarks indicate that the relative position of Indian goods in the US market remains an important consideration before the agreement becomes operational.

External Affairs Minister S Jaishankar also spoke about the negotiations at the Bloomberg New Economy Forum this week. He said the discussions were approaching a possible resolution but noted that India’s position relative to competing economies remained an issue.

Jaishankar said the outcome would depend partly on the terms negotiated between India and the United States and partly on how India fares against other competing economies.

Trade negotiations moving forward, says Commerce Secretary

Commerce Secretary Rajesh Agrawal said the negotiations were progressing in the right direction and that both countries hoped to conclude and sign the agreement at the earliest possible time.

He explained that the signing would depend on the formalisation of the broader tariff structure in the United States. Parallel work was also underway in Washington, including processes linked to Section 301.

Agrawal indicated that the two sides would move towards signing the agreement at a mutually agreed time after the relevant tariff framework was formalised.

Earlier this month, US Trade Representative Jamieson Greer said India and the United States were working to resolve outstanding issues, although an agreement was not imminent at that point.

India-US trade talks and bilateral relations

India and the United States have been negotiating the proposed bilateral trade pact since early 2025. The discussions aim to address tariff-related differences, reduce non-tariff barriers and improve market access between the two countries.

The negotiations have taken place against the backdrop of broader strains in bilateral relations, including disputes over tariffs and differences concerning other policy issues.

While the finalisation of the first tranche marks progress in the negotiations, the agreement still needs to move through the remaining legal and procedural steps before it can be signed and implemented.

The next steps will depend on the completion of legal drafting, the finalisation of the US tariff framework and the two countries’ agreement on the terms governing the pact.