V-C search: ‘Ordinance silent on transparency’

R. Sujatha

A section of academics feels the amendment makes no mention of following UGC norms in the selection procedure

A cross section of academics is of the view that the recent Ordinance amending the Tamil Nadu Universities Laws is silent on the aspect of transparency in appointing Vice-Chancellors to various universities. The ordinance, promulgated recently, had provided for significant changes in the composition of the three-member Vice-Chancellor search committees, prescribing qualifications for members of these committees.

The ordinance stipulated that the Governor-Chancellor shall nominate a retired judge of the Supreme Court or any High Court to the panel, while a bureaucrat in the rank of principal secretary or an eminent academician shall be nominated by the State and the university senate would nominate another member.

However, academics and office-bearers of teachers’ associations argue that the Ordinance cannot be a panacea for curing the ills afflicting the university system. The Ordinance makes no mention about following the UGC Regulations, which prescribes minimum qualifications for appointing Vice-Chancellors or about their selection procedure.

“It is now imperative that the State either adopt the University Grants Commission norms for V-C appointment, or at least come up with stringent regulations to ensure quality V-Cs are appointed,” says a former professor who has been on V-C search committees.

“As public-funded institutions the details of selection process should be in the public domain,” says a retired professor who has been on V-C search committees, adding, “Information such as the applicants that the search committee had considered; applications received; and the basis for selection are shrouded in secrecy.”

Transparency could eliminate corruption as has been the case with the Teachers Recruitment Board, which has reduced irregularities in appointment of teachers.

‘Why bureaucrats?’

Questioning the need for nominating civil servants to the V-C search committee, a professor contends, “Bureaucrats have little role in the university system but wield greater power than teachers from the college system. Also it is the quality of the retired judge or the bureaucrat in the committee that would ultimately decide the choice of candidates.”

S. Subburaju, convenor Joint Action Council of College Teachers Association says, “Typically, University syndicates comprising 18-20 members, including four directors and three secretaries represent the government. The V-C, registrar and the controller of examination are usually the government’s choice too. Only a few are elected members.” He feels if eminent academics are given the job of shortlisting Vice-Chancellor probables, then they would help weed out incompetent candidates. Teachers nominated to the search committees would serve as watchdogs, he claims.

The Teachers’ Association of Bharathidasan University, in a letter to the Chancellor on May 30, suggested that the V-C aspirant’s academic credentials in research and teaching and extension activities should be taken into account. It also wanted, on the committee, an eminent academician with better credentials than the applicants.

Meanwhile it is not clear if the Ordinance would nullify the search committees that were constituted much earlier for shortlisting Vice-Chancellor aspirants for the Periyar University in Salem and Bharathidasan University in Tiruchi.