Answer

The role of the Governor as Chancellor of State universities in India has been a subject of increasing debate. Recent developments, such as the West Bengal government’s 2022 Bill to replace the Governor with the Chief Minister as Chancellor of 31 state public universities, highlight the growing concerns over the politicization of this office.

Enroll now for UPSC Online Course

Role of the Governor as Chancellor of State universities

Rooted in Colonial-Era Practices

• Colonial Control over Universities: The “Governor as Chancellor” model, introduced in 1857, was designed to centralize control, restricting university autonomy rather than promoting academic freedom.
  For example: Governors of presidencies acted as ex-officio Chancellors of universities like Bombay, Calcutta, and Madras to suppress institutional independence.
• Unrevised Post-Independence: Post-1947, the colonial framework was adopted without reassessing its relevance in a democratic and federal context.
  For example: The continuation of discretionary powers, such as appointing Vice-Chancellors, reflects outdated colonial authority, hindering university autonomy.

Contemporary Challenges of Governor’s role as Chancellor of State universities

• Politicisation of the Role: Governors, often active or retired politicians, prioritize loyalty to the Centre, exacerbating political interference in university governance.
  For example: Ashok Pankaj’s study (1950–2015) revealed over 50% of Governors were politicians, undermining neutrality in university affairs.
• Governor vs. State Conflicts: In Opposition-ruled States, Governors bypass ministerial advice, creating conflicts and delays in crucial decisions.
  For example: Delays in Tamil Nadu and West Bengal in appointing Vice-Chancellors reflected governance paralysis due to Governor-State conflicts.
• Erosion of University Autonomy: Governors have significant discretionary powers, often bypassing the State government in crucial matters like Vice-Chancellor appointments and university legislation.
  For example: In Gujarat and Karnataka, Governors held power over university matters without consultation, weakening State governance.
• Political Interference in Academia: Governors’ political affiliations sometimes lead them to prioritize the Centre’s agenda over academic freedom and university self-governance.
  For example: Maharashtra faced issues where Governors were seen prioritizing political over academic appointments, limiting universities’ ability to function independently.
• Governance Paralysis: Dual authority between Governors and State governments creates confusion, often leading to inefficiencies and delays in university administration.
  For example: West Bengal’s university system faced administrative delays due to conflicting decisions between the Governor and the State government.
• Lack of Accountability: Governors, not elected representatives, lack accountability to the people of the State, leading to poorly informed decisions and ineffective governance.
  For example: The appointment delay in Kerala, where the Governor stalled university leadership decisions, reflected the challenges in effective governance without State accountability.

Positive Relevance of Governor as Chancellor in a Federal India

• Neutral Arbiter: The Governor can serve as a neutral figure, maintaining a balance between State governments and universities, ensuring fairness in university governance.
  For example: The Governor’s role in Tamil Nadu, where they oversee university affairs despite political tensions, helps maintain a semblance of neutrality in educational administration.
• Institutional Stability: The Governor’s position could offer stability to universities by avoiding frequent changes in leadership based on political shifts at the State level.
  For example: The Governor’s influence has been seen in ensuring continuity during political transitions in Maharashtra, where university governance remained stable despite government changes.
• Uniformity in Governance: As a representative of the Union, the Governor helps maintain a degree of uniformity in the governance of higher education institutions across states, fostering national standards and coordination.
• Check Against State Overreach: The Governor’s presence ensures that state governments do not dominate universities for political or electoral purposes.By having a neutral authority, academic and administrative processes are insulated from local political considerations
  For example: The Governor’s involvement in Kerala’s university appointments ensures that decisions are made without excessive political influence from the ruling party.
• Federal Balance: The Governor ensures that the central government’s policies are implemented uniformly across states, promoting a consistent educational framework.
  For example: The Governor’s role in overseeing the implementation of central education policies in Uttar Pradesh helps align the state’s educational system with national standards.

Shortcomings of Governor as Chancellor in a Federal India

• Politicization of the Office: The Governor’s position has become increasingly politicized, leading to conflicts between State governments and the Centre, undermining the independence of universities.
  For example: In West Bengal, political friction between the Governor and Chief Minister has led to delayed university appointments, creating governance gridlock.
• Lack of Academic Expertise: Many Governors lack the required academic qualifications or experience to effectively manage higher education institutions, resulting in poor decision-making.
  For example: The appointment of a Governor with no academic background may lead to ineffective handling of university affairs, undermining educational reforms.
• Administrative Inefficiency:  The dual role of the Governor as the constitutional head of the state and as the Chancellor of multiple universities leads to delays in decision-making, impacting the smooth functioning of higher education institutions.
• Bureaucratic Control: The Governor’s discretionary powers often bypass the democratic oversight of State governments, concentrating too much authority in non-elected hands.
  For example: The Governor’s unilateral actions in Maharashtra, including control over university appointments, have sidelined the State government, raising concerns about bureaucratic overreach.
• Insufficient Accountability: While Governors exercise significant authority as Chancellors, they are not directly accountable to the state legislature or the people, leading to a lack of transparency in their actions.

Check Out UPSC CSE Books From PW Store

Measures to Address These Issues

• Governor as Ceremonial Chancellor: The Governor should hold a purely ceremonial role in universities, removing discretionary powers and ensuring decisions are made by the State government or university bodies.
  For example: Gujarat and Karnataka have adopted this model, where the Governor acts as a figurehead, and the State government makes academic and administrative decisions.
• Appointment of Eminent Academics: States should appoint qualified academicians or public figures as Chancellors to ensure university autonomy and avoid political interference in academic matters.
  For example: Telangana’s model of appointing eminent academics as Chancellors ensures that university governance is led by experienced individuals with no political affiliations.
• Increased Transparency in Appointments: Universities should establish transparent, merit-based processes for appointing Chancellors and Vice-Chancellors, reducing the risk of politicization.
  For example: The Kerala Bill, which mandates transparent appointments for Chancellors, is a step toward ensuring that academic merit governs university leadership.
• Consultative Role of the State Government: The Governor should be required to consult with the State government or a designated academic body before making key decisions in university governance.
  For example: The West Bengal Bill, which limits the Governor’s powers by requiring consultation with the State government for key university decisions, could serve as a model.
• Legislative Oversight: University laws should mandate that decisions on university governance, including the appointment of Chancellors and Vice-Chancellors, be subject to legislative scrutiny to ensure accountability.
  For example: States like Maharashtra have introduced reforms where the legislative assembly is involved in approving university appointments, strengthening democratic accountability.

Addressing the challenges associated with the Governor’s role as Chancellor requires a comprehensive approach. Implementing reforms such as appointing eminent academicians as Chancellors, ensuring transparent appointment processes, and enhancing legislative oversight can mitigate politicisation and promote university autonomy. These measures are essential to uphold the integrity and academic freedom of India’s higher education institutions.

DOWNLOAD PDF