NEW DELHI: The draft University Grants Commission (UGC) regulations, 2025 has sparked a political slugfest, with non-BJP-ruled states in the South opposing the proposals, which aim to transform how faculty members are recruited and promoted across higher education institutions (HEIs) in the country.
At the heart of the opposition is the contentious issue of the overarching power given to the centrally appointed governors in selecting and appointing Vice-Chancellors of various universities.
While launching the Draft UGC (Minimum Qualifications for Appointment and Promotion of Teachers and Academic Staff in Universities and Colleges and Measures for the Maintenance of Standards in Higher Education) Regulations, 2025, Union education minister Dharmendra Pradhan had on January 6 said, “By promoting flexibility, inclusivity, and recognising diverse talents, we are paving the way for a dynamic academic future for India.”
However, it came under attack from not only from Opposition-ruled states like Himachal Pradesh, Jharkhand, Kerala, Tamil Nadu, Telangana and Karnataka, which also passed a resolution calling for its repeal at a conclave of higher education ministers, but also some of the teachers’ associations for diluting the eligibility criteria for hiring.
The draft seeks to replace the 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). It is part of the Narendra Modi government’s push to implement the National Education Policy-2020 (NEP 2020).
The main concern of the Opposition, including the Congress, is that despite education falling under the concurrent list, the draft demonstrates the Centre’s attempt to control HEIs through governors in states they do not rule.
While Kerala Chief Minister Pinarayi Vijayan described it as “undemocratic and excessive", Tamil Nadu Chief Minister M K Stalin went a step ahead and wrote to Pradhan demanding the withdrawal of the draft. In a separate letter, Stalin urged chief ministers of all non-BJP-ruled states, including West Bengal, to adopt a resolution to register their vehement opposition to the draft.
As the political heat over the proposed regulations intensified, the UGC extended the deadline for public feedback from February 5 to February 28.
The draft proposes that the chancellor – the governor – will constitute the search-cum-selection committee to pick the VCs, with no role of the states in the entire procedure. In most state-run universities, the governor is the chancellor. The new rule proposes that any violation will attract debarment from participating in UGC schemes and denying funding under the UGC Act.
Many experts say the new rule has been introduced keeping in mind the past tussles between the states — mainly Tamil Nadu and Kerala — where the appointment of VCs in universities became a major flashpoint between the state governments and governors.
Another controversial guideline is the direct appointment as VC of an individual with at least 10 years of senior-level experience in industry, public administration, public policy, or even PSUs.
According to Kerala's higher education minister R Bindu, the draft subverts the principles of the Constitution. “The fact that the draft UGC regulations may turn into an assault on the rights of the state governments is most evident in selecting Vice-Chancellors in state public universities,” she told this paper.
She said the guidelines regarding the VCs' appointment do not provide any scope for representation of the state government in the selection committee.
Earlier, states were represented in the search-cum-selection committee. "According to the present draft, the state governments that fund the universities and supervise their activities will be denied their democratic rights," she added.
Pointing out the minimum qualification for the appointment of VCs, the CPI(M) leader said the move is to dilute the academic qualifications required for Vice-Chancellorship, which, she said, may adversely affect academic excellence of the universities.
“Such proposals may lead to further commercialisation of higher education, decreasing its integrity, ultimately sabotaging academic freedom and critical thinking. The UGC has the authority to determine the qualification of academic staff, but to intrude into the process of selection and appointment, including that of the Vice-Chancellor, is not only a dilution of the autonomy of the universities and the powers of the states but also a direct act of violation of federal principles in the Constitution,” she said.
DMK's member of Parliament Tiruchi Siva concurred. Stating that the proposed guidelines infringe on the rights of the state government and are against the country's federal structure, he said that in the name of reforming higher education, the Centre is making changes that are practically impossible to adopt.
“The mandate and jurisdiction of the UGC is limited. Some of the most contentious proposals are on the exclusion of the state government from the Vice-Chancellor search committee and allowing non-academicians to be VCs. It is absurd,” the Rajya Sabha MP added.
He said the proposal that anyone without academic experience can become a VC would lead to the induction of people with vested interests. “Above all, any state or university that doesn’t abide by the guidelines will not get grants from the UGC. They will also not be able to award degrees to the students. This is mere arm twisting. We have valid reasons to oppose the bill,” he added.
The Southern states have also upped the ante by holding national conventions in Karnataka and Kerala. At a convention held in Thiruvananthapuram, Kerala on February 20, the four states passed a 15-point resolution rejecting the draft. Hyderabad will host the third conclave soon, said Siva.
Siding with the Southern states' opposition, Prof Rajesh Jha, a former member of the Executive Council at Delhi University, said the proposed regulations would effectively prevent state governments from having any say in the appointments of state university VCs. “The centralising and coercive tone and tenor of this draft has caused genuine concerns among the non-NDA state governments,” he said.
“The draft regulations make the whole recruitment and promotion process very arbitrary, which will not attract talent towards teaching. The Professor of Practice is open to being misused for partisanship and nepotism and violates the reservation policy required for social justice,” he added.
The core agenda of NEP 2020, he said, is privatisation and contractualisation. “The nominees of the private players as VCs will easily usher the publicly funded universities into privatisation without any need for legal changes. The ambiguities will be exploited to make appointments without any merit consideration.”
However, in an earlier interview with this paper, UGC Chairman Prof M Jagadesh Kumar said the changes will “enhance flexibility, inclusivity and excellence in faculty recruitment and career progression.”
On the question of waiving academic credentials for the post of VC in the new regulation, he said, “Running a university requires efficient governance, financial management and strategic vision. Senior public administration, industry, or public policy professionals are well-versed in managing large organisations, handling complex budgets, and navigating regulatory frameworks — skills that are increasingly vital for leading modern universities.”
Other sweeping changes proposed under the new guidelines include academic flexibility and inclusivity. It proposes changes to the composition of the Vice-Chancellor selection committee, making it a three-member panel. This panel will consist of nominees from the Visitor or Chancellor, the UGC, and the university's apex body. Earlier, it was a three to five-member panel.
The new guidelines aim to amend the norms for hiring faculty members in universities, allowing people with a postgraduate degree in Master of Engineering (ME) or Masters of Technology (MTech) with at least 55% marks directly to the assistant professor level to get recruited directly without clearing the UGC NET exam.
Under the existing guidelines, candidates are required to have degrees in the same subject at the undergraduate, postgraduate, and even PhD levels to qualify for teaching positions. But now, candidates can teach subjects based on their highest academic specialisation. For example, a candidate with a PhD in chemistry, despite holding a bachelor’s in mathematics and a master’s in physics, would now qualify to teach chemistry.
Earlier, UGC guidelines relied on the Academic Performance Indicator (API). In the new scheme, score-based shortlisting has been eliminated. Besides, accomplished sportspeople, including those with disabilities, can access teaching roles, which was not there earlier. The draft also stressed the use of Indian languages in academic publications and degree programmes.
Prof E Balaguruamy, former VC of Anna University, Chennai, and former member of UPSC, defended the new guidelines, saying the aim is to improve the quality of teaching, research and governance in higher education institutions in India.
“Moreover, the new regulations would encourage multidisciplinary teaching and research, which will enhance the quality and relevance of education to meet the ever-changing needs of industries,” he told this paper.
“UGC has been established by an Act of Parliament to coordinate and maintain quality and standards in universities nationwide. It has been implementing its regulations for more than 60 years. Therefore, the new regulations in no way undermine the rights of states. It is miserable that some leaders, without understanding the underlying concept of these regulations, oppose them merely for political reasons and mislead the public and students. It is ridiculous and mischievous to say that RSS is pushing its agenda,” he further said.
He highlighted that governors as chancellors of universities had been the appointing authority of vice-chancellors for decades, adding the new regulations had not given them any extra powers. “New regulations only reemphasise this time-tested procedure,” he said. The only change, he pointed out, is in including a UGC nominee in the search committee.
He slammed states like Tamil Nadu and Kerala for opposing the new regulations, saying they have a vested interest. “They would like to have complete control over the appointment of vice-chancellors so they can choose their people for these coveted posts.”
Citing instances, he said, in Tamil Nadu, sons-in-law, daughters-in-law, sisters, and sisters-in-law of ministers and politicians holding the posts of lecturer and assistant professor had been appointed as Vice Chancellors.
“Surprisingly, a personal assistant to a minister and a personal secretary to a Vice Chancellor were appointed as VCs of leading universities. More astonishingly, a person who had spent more than two years in Delhi's Tihar Jail for smuggling gold was appointed as the VC of a reputed university. The government made all these appointments with the tacit support of the then governors,” he added.
For now, the ball is in the UGC's court. It remains to be seen how it would assimilate the loads of feedback it has already received received in its final rules.
1823: Elphinstone's Minutes: The then Governor of Bombay Presidency, Mountstuart Elphinstone, a Scottish statesman and historian, emphasised the need for English and European sciences education in India
1835: Macaulay's Minutes: Lord T B Macaulay, English historian, peer, politician, and poet, advocated for making Indians "thoroughly good English scholars"
1854: Wood's Dispatch: Sir Charles Wood's dispatch, known as Magna Carta of English Education in India, recommended a comprehensive education scheme from primary schools to universities
1857: Establishment of Universities: The universities of Calcutta, Bombay (now Mumbai), and Madras were set up
1887: University of Allahabad was established
1925: The Inter-University Board (now Association of Indian Universities) was formed to promote university activities
1944: Sargent report recommended a national system of education and the formation of a University Grants Committee
1948: University Education Commission, chaired by Dr S Radhakrishnan, suggested improvements to Indian university education
1952: Union government decided that all cases pertaining to allocation of grants-in-aid from public funds to the Central universities and other universities and institutions of higher learning might be referred to the University Grants Commission
1953: Establishment of UGC: The University Grants Commission was formally inaugurated on December 28 by Maulana Abul Kalam Azad, the then Minister of Education
1956: UGC Act: The UGC was formally established as a statutory body through an Act of Parliament to coordinate and maintain university education standards in India
* UGC promotes and coordinates university education
* Determining and maintaining standards of teaching, examination and research in universities
* Framing regulations on minimum standards of education
* Monitoring developments in the field of collegiate and university education; disbursing grants to universities and colleges
* Serving as a vital link between the Union and state governments and institutions of higher learning
* Advising Central and state governments on the measures necessary for improvement of university education
* The TSR Subramanian Committee, commonly known as the Committee for the Evolution of New Education Policy, proposed an alternative framework for a scaled-back UGC in its National Policy on Education 2016
* It suggested that the UGC may be made considerably thinner, assigning it the job of the administrative centre for the projected National Higher Education Fellowship Program with no further promotional or regulatory obligations
Eligibility: Candidates with 10 years of senior-level experience in industry, public administration, or public policy are eligible for appointment as VCs
Selection: VCs to be selected by a Search-cum-Selection Committee comprising nominees from: (a) Chancellor/Visitor (Governor for most state universities), (b) UGC Chairperson and (c) University’s apex body (e.g., Senate or Syndicate)
Term: VCs will serve a five-year term with eligibility for reappointment
* Currently, there are 56 Central University, established under an Act of Parliament, and are administered by the Union govt
* The Visitor, their ceremonial head, is the President of India
* The composition of the committee to appoint the VC of a Central university is determined by the Act that governs the university
* The Chancellor/Visitor (typically the President of India) appoints the VC from the list of recommended names provided by the committee
* Appointments are made by the Governor of respective states
* One member of the Search-Cum-Selection Committee is nominated by the UGC Chairperson
* The composition of the rest of the committee:
For state universities: Constituted in accordance with the respective state laws.
For private universities: Defined by the university’s governance framework, as approved by the state government
Kerala: Conflict began in 2021 over Kannur University VC reappointment by Governor. In 2023, the Kerala assembly passed a bill to replace the Governor with educationists as Chancellors. It's awaiting President’s assent
West Bengal: Supreme Court is handling the state’s challenge to a 2023 High Court order allowing unilateral interim VC appointments by the Governor. In 2023, the Assembly passed a bill to replace the Governor with the chief minister as Chancellor. It's awaiting the Governor's assent. In 2024, SC appointed former Chief Justice U U Lalit to oversee VC selection committees
Tamil Nadu: In 2022, the state government passed two Bills allowing the state government to appoint VCs; these were not approved by the Governor. In 2023, the Governor objected to search committee notifications for not including a UGC nominee, leaving appointments pending.
* If any HEI violates the provisions of these regulations, the UGC shall constitute an enquiry committee to look into them. If the violations are established, the HEI shall be:
(a) Debarred from participating in UGC schemes
(b) Debarred from offering degree programmes
(c) Debarred from offering ODL and online mode programmes
(d) Removed from the list of HEIs maintained under Sections 2(f) and 12B of UGC Act 1956
The HEI shall be subjected to one or more of the above actions. Further, UGC may take additional punitive actions on a case-to-case basis
* In the event of any conflict or inconsistency with respect to these regulations, the UGC's interpretation shall be final and binding
A panel of 3-5 search-cum-selection committee members will do the cherry-picking
A panel of 3-5 search-cum-selection committee members will do the cherry-picking. One member of the panel nominated by UGC head. Gave states room to add their nominees in panel
One member of the panel nominated by UGC head. Gave states room to add their nominees in panel
