The Delhi-based All India Council for Technical Education (AICTE), the apex body which licences and monitors the education being dispensed in 5,000-plus profes-sional education institutions across the country, has pulled up 20 private engineering, business and hotel management education institutions in Karnataka (17 of them located in Bangalore) for introducing new study programmes without its approval. Among those under the scanner are big-time Bangalore-based education players — Sikkim Manipal University, M.S. Ramaiah School of Advanced Studies, M.P. Birla Institute of Management, and the Indian Business Academy.
In a letter to the Karnataka chief secretary, AICTE member secretary, K. Narayana Rao, has asked the state government “to take necessary action” against the 20 errant colleges, “including lodging FIR against societies, individuals, companies and trusts under Indian Penal Code and other laws”. Subsequently on August 4, H. U. Talwar, deputy director, department of technical education in the state government, wrote to the heads of the 20 institutes asking them to submit proof of approval from AICTE, or face legal action.
Under the AICTE Act, 1987 which confers statutory powers of approval and superintendence upon the council, all ‘technical education’ — diploma, degree and postgrad — study programmes offered by professional education institutions countrywide require the approval seal of the council. But this diktat is followed more in the breach than observance. Of the estimated 15,000-plus professional education programmes offered by institutions in the country, only 2,000 are accredited by the council. Given AICTE’s archaic approval processes, cumber-some paperwork, and corrupt bureaucracy, most colleges prefer to receive ex post facto approval.
Moreover, it’s well-known that AICTE is liberal about approving new study programmes with a reputation for granting quick permissions, provided its nuisance value is acknowledged by technical education institutions. According to the U.R. Rao Committee, constituted by the Union human resource development ministry to review the performance of AICTE in November 2002, the council has failed to regulate the growth of the country’s technical institutes to match industry demand, and is responsible for the current state of affairs which has resulted in 90 percent of engineering students studying in non-accredited institutions.
“Through its irrational, too-liberal licencing policy AICTE has created a technical education system so large that it can neither regulate nor manage it. To show that they are on the job, once a year AICTE officials compile a list of colleges violating its rules without bothering to assess the quality of academic programmes offered,” says the director of a Bangalore-based management college which has been served a show cause notice by AICTE.
There also seems to be confusion over the role of local universities vis-à-vis AICTE. Most of the 20 professional education institutions pulled up by AICTE are affiliated with and accredited by state universities. Comments Dr. Shaji Thomas, director of the Academy of Business Management, Tourism and Research, Bangalore: “We offer two undergrad and postgrad programmes accredited by Bangalore University and an executive MBA programme recognised by Punjab Technical University. As these study programmes have been approved by state universities, we don’t need AICTE’s approval. We have conveyed this to AICTE and the Karnataka technical education department.”
Most college principals back Thomas’ interpretation of the legal obligations of AICTE-approved institu-tions while others say that AICTE officials target them for not genuflecting (paying up). Meanwhile AICTE has issued a note warning students to beware of professional education institutions dispensing “dubious quality study programmes”.
According to AICTE sources, at its meeting scheduled this month the council is expected to place the 20 errant professional institutions in Karnataka on its blacklist, which AICTE managers believe will hurt their market standing. But within the institutions, there is little apprehension about losing AICTE approval. They believe that over the years they have built their market reputations, and that industry recognition is more important than AICTE accreditation. In support of this argument they cite the case of the privately promoted Indian School of Business, Hyderabad, which hasn’t bothered to obtain AICTE recognition and yet has emerged as the country’s top B-school besting the IIMs in terms of remuneration packages offered by Indian industry to its graduates.
The gradual transformation of the apex-level AICTE from a standards-setting institution for technical education into a mere licencing organisation has resulted in its own marginalisation, with professional colleges showing scant respect towards its accreditation and approval. Little wonder that even the National Knowledge Commission in its report of January 2007 to prime minister Manmohan Singh has suggested the withdrawal of its licencing powers.
Sic transit gloria.
Summiya Yasmeen (Bangalore)
