House panel endorses govt-funded quotas for SCs, STs, OBCs in pvt higher education institutions
The Parliamentary Standing Committee on Education, Women, Children, Youth and Sports, chaired by Congress Rajya Sabha MP Digvijay Singh, tabled its 370th report Wednesday on the implementation of Article 15(5) of the Constitution regarding special provisions for reservations for SCs, STs, and OBCs in educational institutions, including private ones.
New Delhi: Noting the significantly low OBC admissions and 'abysmally low' SC and ST enrollments in private universities in India, a parliamentary panel has recommended implementing reservations in private higher education institutions for marginalised students, with full financial support from the government to ensure equal access to quality education.
Under the Central Educational Institutions (Reservation in Admission) Act, 2006, and as enabled by Articles 15(4) and 15(5) of the Constitution, central educational institutions in India provide 15 percent reservation for SCs, 7.5 percent for STs, 27 percent for OBCs, and 10 percent for EWS.
However, private educational institutions are not legally required to implement reservation policies, as no statute mandates them to do so.
According to the report, there is a significant gap between official data and actual enrollment figures.
The committee noted that, as per data from the Department of Higher Education, Ministry of Education, private HEIs reportedly have 40 percent OBC, 14.9 percent SC, and 5 percent ST students.
However, data provided by the private universities themselves reflect much lower OBC admissions and 'abysmally low' SC and ST enrollments.
The report highlights lower admissions in OBC, SC and ST categories in esteemed private universities including Birla Institute of Technology and Science (BITS), OP Jindal Global and Shiv Nadar University.
It states that during the 2024-25 academic year at Birla Institute of Technology and Science, out of 5,137 students, approximately 514 (10 percent) are OBC, 29 (0.5 percent) are SC, and 4 (0.08 percent) are ST, with some students not declaring their category. Similarly, at O.P. Jindal Global University, out of 3,181 students, only 28 SC and 29 ST students are enrolled, each constituting less than 1 percent. At Shiv Nadar University, among 3,359 students, SCs number 48 (1.5 percent) and STs 29 (about 0.5 percent).
'The Committee, therefore, recommends that the Department of Higher education implement reservation quotas in educational institutions, including private ones, in proportion to the population of SCs, STs, and OBCs,' the report stated.
It further urged the establishment of a central oversight mechanism—such as the UGC, National Commission for Backward Classes, and SC/ST Commissions—to monitor implementation of Article 15(5) of the Constitution ensuring that institutions submit annual admission data to ensure compliance.
Also Read: Indian universities must not mimic Ivy Leagues. Global rankings won't build Viksit Bharat
Divide in higher education
According to government data cited by the parliamentary panel, India has 685 government-managed universities (including 240 central and 445 state institutions) and 473 private unaided universities.
Among the country's 45,473 colleges, only 21.5 percent are government-run, 13.2 percent are privately aided, and a majority—65.3 percent—are private unaided institutions.
The Standing Committee noted a growing divide in Indian higher education between a small number of well-resourced private and select government institutions, and the majority of higher education institutions that struggle to match their quality.
'The Committee strongly emphasizes that education must be a key instrument of attaining social justice in this country, and noted that the current absence of reservations in private HEIs may be an impediment to the same,' the report stated.
To address this imbalance, the committee recommended that Article 15(5) of the Constitution be implemented in full through parliamentary legislation.
The committee specifically proposes reserving 27 percent of seats for OBCs, 15 percent for SCs, and 7.5 percent for STs in private higher educational institutions.
It also noted that the high fees charged by private universities make education inaccessible for marginalized students and urged the State to legislate financial and structural support to ensure effective implementation of these reservations.
The committee also recommended that the department take steps to improve the quality of data collected on student composition in both private and public HEIs.
'It is important for HEIs and the department to understand the social composition of the student body as well as the prospective pool of applicants. The current system of making caste declaration optional may result in a caste-blindness of the admissions process,' the report stated.
Also Read: The history of Indian caste censuses is the history of Indian statecraft
Financial support from govt
The committee stated that any introduction of reservations for SCs, STs, and OBCs in private higher educational institutions must be fully funded by the government. It recommended adopting a model similar to the 25 percent quota under Section 12(1)(c) of the Right to Education Act, where private schools are reimbursed by the government for admitting students from disadvantaged backgrounds, in the higher education institutions as well.
Observing that expanding reservation will require increasing seats and infrastructure like classrooms, hostels, faculty, the committee recommended that central and state governments should allocate dedicated funds for private HEIs to increase seats, build infrastructure, and hire faculty in institutions implementing reservations.
'The Central and state government should also supplement resources through Public Private Partnerships (PPP) in education. The Department of Higher Education, Ministry of Education, through Higher Education Funding Agency (HEFA) should provide low-interest loans to HEIs/ Universities for infrastructure expansion, ensuring no reduction in general category seats to avoid reducing general category opportunities,' the report stated.
The Committee recommends that the department of higher education develop certain model programmes (bridge courses, free coaching for entrance exams, etc.) that private HEIs can adopt to support effective implementation of Article 15(5).
'Similarly, the Department may also provide scholarships which can bear the burden of living costs in hostels to students taking admission through quotas in private HEIs,' the report added.
Reacting to the report, Congress general secretary in charge of communications Jairam Ramesh posted on social media platform X, 'The legitimate demand of SC, ST, and OBC communities for reservations in private higher education institutions can no longer be ignored.'
He added that the party's 2024 Nyay Patra had pledged to legislate the implementation of Article 15(5), and the Committee's report has given fresh momentum to this commitment.
Also Read: India's higher education system needs to level up. A third pillar of experts can help
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Hindustan Times
34 minutes ago
- Hindustan Times
Can't let Governors sit on bills indefinitely: SC
New Delhi: Permitting governors to sit indefinitely on bills passed by state legislatures may render the democratic process and the will of the people 'defunct', the Supreme Court observed on Thursday, as it continued hearing the presidential reference on whether the courts can prescribe timelines for gubernatorial and presidential assent. The Supreme Court building in New Delhi. (HT Photo) A constitution bench of Chief Justice of India (CJI) Bhushan R Gavai and justices Surya Kant, Vikram Nath, PS Narasimha and Atul S Chandurkar is examining President Droupadi Murmu's Article 143 reference made in May. The reference seeks clarity on the top court's April 8 ruling which, for the first time, laid down timelines for governors and the president to decide on state bills pending before them. 'If a particular function is entrusted to the governor and for years he withholds it, will that also be beyond the scope of judicial review of this court? When this court has set aside constitutional amendments taking away judicial review as violating the basic structure, can we now say that however high a constitutional authority may be, courts will still be powerless if it does not act?' the bench asked. The bench also pressed the Centre to explain what remedy exists when governors indefinitely delay action. 'Under Article 200, if we hold that the governor has unlimited power to withhold a bill for time immemorial, what is the safeguard for a duly elected legislature? Suppose a legislature elected by a two-thirds majority passes a bill unanimously, and the governor simply sits on it, it would make the legislature totally defunct,' it further remarked. Solicitor General (SG) Tushar Mehta, appearing for the Union government, countered that while the court's concern may be justified, it cannot assume jurisdiction to set time limits where the Constitution is silent. 'A justification can never confer jurisdiction. Every problem in this country may not have a solution in the Supreme Court. Some problems must find solutions within the system,' he said. According to Mehta, the solution was in the 'political process, not judicial directions'. He argued that chief ministers could engage directly with governors, prime ministers, or even the President to resolve such impasses. 'Such issues have been arising for decades but have always been resolved through political statesmanship and maturity. Why cannot we trust other constitutional functionaries? The remedy ultimately will lie with Parliament by way of an amendment, not by judicial legislation,' Mehta submitted. At this, the bench interjected: 'When there is no outer limit, can a constitutional interpretation be left to a vacuum? Though a time limit may not be prescribed, there must be some way the process works. There cannot be a situation where not acting on a bill itself is a full stop… nothing further.' The bench also questioned whether judicial review could be completely excluded. The court observed: 'The decision may not be justiciable, but the decision-making process certainly falls within the ambit of judicial review.' Mehta, however, warned that opening the door to scrutiny would lead to 'multilevel challenges' at every stage of a governor's or president's decision under Articles 200 and 201. 'Our problem is every step before the final decision will also be challenged because they can also constitute a 'decision',' he argued. He cited judicial precedents where the court held that fixed timelines for criminal trials could not be judicially prescribed, to reinforce his submission that timelines in constitutional processes too cannot be judicially imposed. But the bench pressed further, citing petitions already filed by Kerala, Punjab, and West Bengal. 'Suppose a decision is not taken for four years. What happens to the democratic set-up of the government? What happens to the will of the two-thirds majority of the legislature?' it asked. Mehta responded with an analogy: 'Take the example of a trial pending for 10 years. Can the President step in and declare that the punishment is deemed to have been undergone because the judiciary has delayed? Separation of powers means some issues are non-justiciable.' The court, however, made it clear that it was not dealing with a hypothetical concern. 'We are having petitions from at least four states,' the court underlined. The presidential reference, prompted by the court's April judgment in the Tamil Nadu case, asks whether the judiciary can impose timelines on constitutional authorities like governors and the president when the Constitution itself is silent. In that ruling, a two-judge bench also fixed a three-month deadline for the president to decide on bills referred by a governor, and one month for a governor to act on re-enacted bills. It had even invoked Article 142 to deem 10 Tamil Nadu bills as assented to, after holding that the governor's prolonged inaction was 'illegal'. Mehta criticised the notion of deemed assent. 'Deemed assent would mean your lordships substituted yourselves for the governor and declared the assent deemed to have been granted. Article 142 cannot be used to amend the Constitution,' he argued. The bench, however, maintained that courts cannot abdicate their role as custodians of the Constitution. 'Every wrong has to have a remedy. Whether the hands of the constitutional court will be tied when a constitutional functionary refuses to discharge their function without any valid reason? Whether the court will say we are powerless?' the bench asked. Arguments on the reference will continue on August 26.
Time of India
an hour ago
- Time of India
Lateral entry not subject to reservations, government informs Rajya Sabha
Rajya Sabha NEW DELHI: Ministry of personnel on Thursday said 63 appointments made in central government departments since 2018 through lateral entry, were not subject to reservation as they were made for specific assignments, keeping in view the candidates' specialised knowledge and domain expertise. In reply to a written question in Rajya Sabha, junior minister for personnel Jitendra Singh said "since each of these appointments were made against single-post cadre, reservation is not applicable in view of Supreme Court judgement in the case 'PGIMER, Chandigarh vs. Faculty Association and Ors'." "Accordingly category-wise data of the appointed officers has not been maintained," he added. The minister said of the 63 officers appointed in three cycles (2018, 2021 and 2023) so far at the level of joint secretary, deputy secretary and director, 43 are currently in position across various ministries/departments. Following a political row over the policy for reservation of SCs, STs and OBCs not being followed in lateral appointments, UPSC had in Aug last year cancelled an advertisement for recruitment to 45 posts through this route. The UPSC action followed a communication from Singh, urging the commission to cancel the advertisement as "this (reservation) aspect needs to be reviewed and reformed in context of PM's focus on ensuring social justice".
Hindustan Times
2 hours ago
- Hindustan Times
BJP gets going for 2026 semi-finals before 2027 battle
: Coining the slogan 'purva tayari - poorna tayari' (advance preparation, complete preparation), the BJP has started micro- management by reaching out to every booth for the panchayat polls that are about eight to nine months away. For the BJP's top brass, the panchayat polls in 2026 are the semi-finals before the crucial assembly polls in 2027. (For representation only) The BJP has activated its workers in every village at the booth level and the cadres have started moving door -to-door to register voters. For the BJP's top brass, the panchayat polls in 2026 are the semi-finals before the crucial assembly polls in 2027. Reaching out to party workers in every district, BJP state general secretary (organization) Dharamal Singh has taken up the mantle to ensure that the party shines in all the 75 zila panchayats. 'The party has made a strategy to reach out to the rural voters by activating the booth committees, divisional units and Shakti Kendras. The importance of panchayat elections is being explained to workers by holding meetings in each district,' said BJP state vice-president Santsh Singh. The party is focusing on zila panchayat seats and not on gram panchayat and kshetra panchayats. 'As panchayat elections are not held on the party's symbol, the BJP will focus only on the zila panchayat seats. The party will not interfere in the elections of gram pradhan and kshetra panchayat members to avoid any controversy,' a party leader said. 'The maximum controversy and animosity is for the elections of gram pradhan and kshetra panchayat. Most of the party workers want to become pradhan or kshetra panchayat members. In such a situation, to avoid controversy, the party has decided not to interfere in the election of gram pradhan and kshetra panchayats,' he added. 'The first test for the recently constituted booth committees, mandal units and Shakti Kendra s will be the panchayat polls. The party leadership has conveyed that the outperforming workers will be rewarded,' said a BJP leader. The party is also apprising villagers of various welfare schemes of the state government. The state leadership of the party is also viewing panchayat polls as an opportunity for a major course correction after the poor performance in the 2024 Lok Sabha polls in Uttar Pradesh. In a bid to counter the Samajwadi Party's PDA (Pichhda, Dalits and Alpsankhyak) formula, the BJP too will focus on the local caste matrix at the mandal and village level. The BJP's seriousness about the panchayat polls is not without reason. In four successive poll victories in Uttar Pradesh—2014 and 2019 Lok Sabha and 2017, 2022 assembly polls – the BJP managed the most diverse representation minus Muslims. The party succeeded in keeping intact its caste umbrella, broadly non-Jatav Dalits, non-Yadav OBCs and upper castes, in four polls in Uttar Pradesh. However, in the 2024 Lok Sabha poll, the SP's PDA plank succeeded in bringing a large chunk of OBC and Dalits into its fold, dealing a blow to the BJP. The BJP's tally of seats in Uttar Pradesh came down to 33 in the last Lok Sabha election from 62 in 2019. The most resounding defeat was in the Faizabad Lok Sabha constituency, the nerve of centre saffron politics revolving around the temple town of Ayodhya. Panchayat elections Total gram panchayats-57,694 Kshetra panchayats-826 Zila panchayats-75
