Last Updated:
Representatives of Himachal Pradesh, Jharkhand, Kerala, Tamil Nadu, Telangana, and Karnataka sought the immediate withdrawal of the draft UGC regulations 2025 for the appointment of vice-chancellors and the recruitment of academic and non-academic staff, saying they severely curtail the rights of states
The University Grants Commission, an autonomous body under the central government, released the UGC (Minimum Qualifications for Appointment & Promotion of Teachers and Academic Staff in Universities and Colleges and Measures for the Maintenance of Standards in Higher Education) Regulations, 2025, on January 6. The draft rules are open to public feedback till February 6. (File image: UGC)
A joint resolution has been passed in the conclave of state higher education ministers where representatives of Himachal Pradesh, Jharkhand, Kerala, Tamil Nadu, Telangana, and Karnataka sought the immediate withdrawal of the draft UGC regulations 2025, saying they severely curtail the rights of states.
Karnataka higher education minister Dr MC Sudhakar criticised the UGC’s proposed regulations, calling them a “severe assault” on the autonomy of state governments in higher education. He alleged that the Centre, through the UGC, was trying to curb states’ constitutional powers by imposing centralised policies without consultation.
“We are hopeful that the central government will call all states once again for a meeting and have another round of discussions on this draft bill to seek our inputs. We are hopeful that they will do that, as this is how democracy works,” said the minister.
A fifteen-point joint resolution was passed unanimously, which, the participating states said, severely curtails the rights of the states in constituting the search-cum-selection committees for the selection of vice-chancellors.
The joint resolution also points out the contentious provision of non-academicians being appointed as vice-chancellors.
The new set of draft regulations issued by the University Grants Commission (UGC) for the appointment of vice-chancellors and the recruitment of academic and non-academic staff has triggered controversy. On January 6, union education minister Dharmendra Pradhan unveiled the draft UGC regulations. These proposed regulations and guidelines (UGC 2025) are set to replace the existing UGC Regulations on Minimum Qualifications for Appointment of Teachers and Other Academic Staff in Universities and Colleges and Measures for the Maintenance of Standards in Higher Education, notified in 2018 (UGC 2018). The move is part of a broader push by the UGC to accelerate the implementation of the National Education Policy, 2020 (NEP 2020).
Sudhakar, who was leading the conclave, said that by convention, governors have served as chancellors of universities. However, this situation has changed over time. In recent years, concerns have grown over governors’ roles, not just administratively but also politically, as many political nominees have been appointed. This has led to strained relations between governors and state governments. Lately, the friction between governors and state governments has taken a new turn, the Karnataka minister said.
“Appointments of vice-chancellors have to be academic appointees, not political appointees. The way the draft bill is structured, it paves the way for them to appoint people who share their ideological thinking, and that is not good for progress. One needs to have a balanced approach,” Sudhakar told News18. “We now see governors sitting in protest on the streets and walking out of assemblies without delivering the joint address.”
Regarding the appointment of vice-chancellors at central institutions like IITs and IIMs, the UGC had previously allowed for a state-appointed member on the selection committee, who would serve as its chairman. The commission also stated that the vice-chancellor should be appointed with considerations of equity and social justice, in concurrence with the state government.
Quoting an example from Gujarat, the BJP-led government introduced an amendment last year, making the governor a ceremonial chancellor while transferring actual powers and responsibilities to the state government. This has been accepted in Gujarat. Ideally, as even the Supreme Court has observed, governors should engage with state governments, resolve issues amicably, and maintain dialogue rather than confrontation—this was the observation of all the ministers who attended the conclave.
The Karnataka minister also emphasised that when state governments are fully responsible for universities—from funding them, ensuring infrastructure, pensions, and faculty appointments—they should have a say in appointing vice-chancellors.
“Since 2014, the UGC has stopped funding research programmes in universities, and developmental grants from the Union government, such as RUSA (which follows a 60:40 funding model), require significant state contributions. If states are responsible and answerable in their legislatures for universities’ functioning, how can they be excluded from the process of appointing vice-chancellors? This raises serious concerns about the autonomy and governance of higher education institutions in the country,” Sudhakar told this reporter.
The joint resolution included:
1.    The state governments must be given a pivotal role in the appointment of vice-chancellors to state public universities. The draft UGC regulations do not envisage any role for the state governments in the appointment of vice-chancellors of public universities established under state acts, thereby undermining the legitimate rights of the state in a federal setup.
2.    The regulations severely curtail the rights of states in constituting the search-cum-selection committees for the selection of vice-chancellors.
3.    The provision allowing the appointment of non-academics as vice-chancellors must be withdrawn.
4.    The qualifications, term, and eligibility for the appointment of vice-chancellors require serious consideration as they impinge on the standards of higher education.
5.    The removal of the Academic Performance Indicator (API) system of evaluation and the introduction of a new system with a high level of discretion must be re-evaluated.
6.    Several provisions related to the appointment of assistant professors require serious reconsideration, including provisions related to the non-requirement of a basic degree in the core subject concerned.
7.    More clarity is sought in the provisions related to contractual appointments, guest faculty, visiting faculty, professors of practice, and emeritus professors before the finalisation of the guidelines.
8.    The provisions related to the consequences of violations of the draft UGC regulations are drastic, excessive, undemocratic, and require serious reconsideration.
9.    Imposing all proposals under the NEP as mandatory and taking punitive measures for non-compliance is coercive and goes against the spirit of state autonomy in a federal framework.
10.   More emphasis in the regulations is required on industry-academia collaboration to enhance innovation and research ecosystems in public universities.
11.   The draft regulations and grading parameters seem designed to promote private institutions while ignoring the welfare aspects of government/public institutions.
12.   Making an entrance exam mandatory for basic undergraduate courses is a huge barrier to increasing GER and providing inclusive education.
13.   Promotions, biannual examinations, fast-track degree programmes, dual degrees, and multiple entry and exit options require further deliberation and clarity before implementation.
14.   There is a need to immediately withdraw the UGC draft regulations of 2025.
15.   The UGC must engage in a collaborative, consultative process with the states in framing these regulations in the spirit of cooperative federalism.
Some regional parties in the National Democratic Alliance (NDA), including the Janata Dal (United), Telugu Desam Party (TDP), and Lok Janshakti Party (Ram Vilas Paswan), have also expressed dissatisfaction over the issue but have refrained from strong opposition due to political constraints.
Minister D Sridhar Babu, Telangana’s representative, spoke to CNN-News18 and said that the spirit of cooperative federalism should be respected. “When bringing draft guidelines, they should have meaningful deliberations with all stakeholders. Education comes under the Concurrent List (under the 7th Schedule of the Constitution). When the state differs, the Centre should call them. This has not been done.”
While interacting with the media, he also said that the draft must be scrapped.
“It is drastic, excessive, and you can call it draconian on certain issues… we demand altogether that it be withdrawn and also that the UGC must engage in a collaborative, consultative process in framing its regulations,” he said.
Jharkhand minister Sudiya Kumar as well as Tamil Nadu’s Govi Chezhian stated that they not only support Karnataka’s move to oppose the draft bill but have also been seeking legal intervention.
With just six states participating in the Bengaluru conclave, the Kerala government has now called for a similar event to be held in the state on February 20, as the dissenting ones look to rally more support behind them against the Centre.
- Location :
Bangalore, India, India
