What to Read in The Hindu Editorial( Topic and Syllabus wise)

Editorial 1: UGC’s draft regulation has serious constitutional issues

Context

The problem arises when the UGC begins to regulate an area which is not a part of the parent Act — namely the selection and the appointment of university vice chancellors.

 

Introduction

The draft regulation by the University Grants Commission (UGC) on the selection and appointment of vice chancellors of universities has evoked protests by non-Bharatiya Janata Party-headed State governments. Their main objection against this regulation is that it constitutes a violation of the federal principles enshrined in the Constitution of India. The State governments concerned have demanded its withdrawal.

 

UGC's Amendment to Regulation 2010: Selection of Vice Chancellors

• UGC's proposal: The UGC has sought to amend Regulation 2010 that relates to the selection and appointment of vice chancellors by widening the area of selection.
• Existing regulations: Under the existing regulations, a vice chancellor can be selected only from among academicians who have a minimum experience of 10 years as professor.
• Proposed amendment: Through this amendment, the UGC declares that professionals with 10-plus years of experience in industry, public administration, or public policy, shall also be considered.
• Constitutional issues: The draft regulation raises serious constitutional issues which need to be examined by separating the political context of protest and a possible political reaction from the UGC or the party in power.

 

The objective of the UGC Act

• Enactment and purpose: The University Grants Commission Act, 1956 was enacted by Parliament to make provision for “the co-ordination and determination of standards in universities and for that purpose, to establish the University Grants Commission”.
• Mandates of the Act: The Act mandates the UGC to take all steps as it thinks fit for:
  1.  
     1. The promotion and coordination of university education.
     2. The determination and maintenance of standards of teaching, examination, and research in universities.
• Functions of the UGC: For performing these functions, the UGC can:
  1.  
     1. Allocate funds to universities for maintenance and development.
     2. Recommend measures for the improvement of university education.
     3. Advise the Union or State governments on the allocation of grants to universities.
     4. Collect information on all matters relating to university education in India and other countries and make them available to universities.
     5. Regulate fees.
• Section 26 of the UGC Act: Section 26 of the UGC Act empowers the UGC to make regulations for implementing the mandate of the Act.
  1. These regulations must be consistent with the Act and the rules made thereunder.
• Key regulations: The most important regulations under Section 26 relate to:
  1.  
     1. Defining the qualifications required of a person to be appointed to the teaching staff in a university.
     2. The minimum standards of instructions for the grant of any degree by a university.
     3. Regulating the maintenance of standards and the coordination of work or facilities in universities.

 

It is not the job of the UGC

•  
  • The crucial point that needs to be considered here is whether the regulation made by the UGC in respect of the selection, qualification, and appointment of vice chancellors is consistent with the provisions of the UGC Act.
  • As a matter of fact, the Act does not contain any provisions relating to the selection and the appointment of vice chancellors.
  • The fundamental objective of the Act is to determine standards in universities and the promotion and the coordination of university education.
  • To lay down the standards of teaching and to prescribe the qualifications of teaching staff whose job is to give instructions, is the main function of the UGC — which it does by making periodic regulations.
  • But the problem arises when this statutory body begins to regulate an area which is not a part of the parent Act. Rules, and regulations are technically called subordinate legislation. The subordinate legislation can be made only in consonance with the provisions in the Act. If the regulation goes outside the scope of the Act, it will be ultra vires the Act, and hence invalid.

 

Role of the UGC

•  
  • A close reading of the Act would show that it was not meant to prescribe the qualifications or mode of selection of vice chancellors.
  • All universities, whether under the Union or the States, are established under a statute made by the respective legislature.
  • Therefore, it is the legislature which prescribes the qualifications, mode of selection, and conditions of service of vice chancellors. It is not the job of the UGC.
  • The selection and the appointment of vice chancellors cannot be considered to be an exercise connected with maintaining the standards of education or promotion and coordination of university education.
  • The Bombay High Court in Suresh Patilkhede vs The Chancellor Universities of Maharashtra and Others (2011) corroborates this view in the following words: “we are of the view that qualifications and method of appointment of Pro-Chancellor and Vice Chancellor of the University cannot be treated as satisfying the ‘direct impact’ test [on the standards of education]”.
  • Therefore, it is safe to assume that under Section 26 of the UGC Act, the UGC has no mandate to make any regulation in respect of the selection and the appointment of vice chancellors.

 

Constitutional Question: Can UGC Regulations Override State Law?

•  
  • An interesting constitutional question which arises in the context of the UGC’s regulations is whether a regulation can over-ride an Act passed by a State legislature.
  • This question came up in the context of the termination of the appointment of some vice chancellors in the past.
  • The Bombay High Court in the Suresh Patilkhede case (supra) took the view that “Regulation 7.3.0 of UGC Regulations, 2010 being a subordinate legislation under an Act of Parliament cannot override plenary legislation enacted by the State Legislature….”
  • However, the Supreme Court of India, in Kalyani Mathivanan vs K.V. Jeyaraj and Ors (AIR 2015 SC 1875 para 22) overruled it by holding “we hold that the U.G.C. Regulations through a subordinate legislation has binding effect on the Universities to which it applies….”
  • The reason given by the Court for reaching this conclusion is that “it is only when both the Houses of the Parliament approve the regulation, the same can be given effect”.
  • It may be clarified here that Parliament does not formally approve any rule or regulation laid in the House. It can only amend a rule which has already come into effect before it is so laid; if Parliament amends the rule, it will, thereafter, be effective in the amended form.
  • With due respect to their lordships, the observation of the Court does not correctly reflect the parliamentary procedure relating to the laying down of rules and regulations in the Houses of Parliament.

 

Article 254 of the Constitution: Repugnancy of Laws

•  
  • The question whether the UGC regulations override a State law can be answered only in terms of Article 254 of the Constitution which deals with repugnancy.
  • Under this Article, if a State law is repugnant to the central law, the State law, to the extent of repugnancy, be void.
  • But is a regulation made by the UGC, a central law within the meaning of Article 254?
  • Clause (2) of this Article says that if the law made by the legislature of a state has been reserved for the consideration of the President and has received his ascent, it shall prevail in the State.
  • In this clause, the word ‘law’ simply means the Bill passed by the legislature and sent to the President. It does not include the rules and regulations which are framed only after ascent is received.
  • So, what overrides a State law is a Bill passed by both Houses of Parliament and assented to by the President, and certainly not the subordinate legislation.

 

Conclusion: A key ruling

In any case, the Court made a significant ruling on the question of mandatory application of Regulation 7.3.0 of the UGC relating to the selection and appointment of vice chancellors in the Kalyani Mathivanan case (supra) it says: “However, the finding of the Bombay High Court that Regulation 7.3.0 has to be treated as recommendatory in nature is upheld in so far as it relates to Universities and Colleges under the State Legislation.” This ruling may perhaps help resolve the present controversy.

Editorial 2: Prioritising IMEC is in America’s best interest

Context

The U.S. and India must ensure the completion of this project, which represents a fundamental reimagining of regional economic cooperation.

 

Introduction

The United States-India relationship has evolved into an increasingly vital strategic partnership ever since the Clinton administration laid the foundation for a new direction in the 1990s. Today, broad bipartisan consensus supports building upon these ties even further, driven by converging interests in economic growth, regional security, and democratic values. As global dynamics shift, the importance of this relationship for the Trump administration becomes even more pronounced.

 

India-Middle East-Europe Economic Corridor (IMEC) Agreement

• Strategic opportunity for President Donald Trump: The IMEC agreement presents a tremendous opportunity for President Donald Trump to solidify this multilateral partnership while advancing both the strategic interests of the U.S. and India.
• U.S. leadership in securing cooperation: By leading the effort to secure cooperation among the participating nations, the U.S. can help create a robust economic corridor to ensure free and open trade routes.
• Benefits of IMEC: The corridor will enhance energy security and promote technological innovation, which will, in turn, also benefit American companies.

 

More conceptual now

• Announcement and Vision: Announced in 2023, IMEC represents an ambitious vision to forge an integrated network spanning three vital regions through advanced physical and digital infrastructure.
• Key Infrastructure Goals: The corridor must develop efficient transportation routes, including:
  1.  
     • Railways
     • Shipping networks
     • Maritime connections
     • Additionally, it involves establishing:
       • Cross-border electricity and hydrogen pipelines
       • Digital communication cables
     • The end goals are to:
       • Enhance trade connectivity.
       • Reduce transportation costs.
       • Diversify global supply chains.
       • Promote deeper economic integration among participating countries (India, the U.S., UAE, Saudi Arabia, Italy, France, Germany, and the European Commission).
• Conceptual nature of IMEC: Currently, IMEC is more conceptual than concrete.
  1. Meeting its ambitious goals requires extensive planning and cooperation.
• Strategic opportunity for the Trump Administration: The Trump administration's leadership on this matter could enhance his legacy on the international stage.
  1. By supporting IMEC, the U.S. and India can establish a compelling alternative to China’s Belt and Road Initiative (BRI), creating a more balanced global economic architecture aligned with western democratic values and market principles.
• Complexity of IMEC: IMEC was never destined to be a straightforward endeavor:
  1. Each participating nation faces a complex calculus of investment, political will, and economic strategy.
  2. Infrastructure investments compete with other national priorities.
  3. Private sector engagement introduces another layer of complexity, requiring clear pathways to return on investment.
• Key Countries and their roles: Several countries have shown substantial initiative, including Greece and Italy.
  1. France has distinguished itself by appointing a special envoy, Gérard Mestrallet, a proven business leader, to head the initiative.
  2. UAE and Saudi Arabia appreciate the role IMEC can play in advancing relationships with the West, and have spearheaded efforts for its implementation.
• Challenges and risks: Without regular, strategic engagement, there is a significant risk of creating an uneven economic landscape that could breed tension and political friction among participating nations.
  1. The corridor offers transformative economic opportunities not just for coastal regions and primary ports but also for inland areas that could become crucial nodes in this expansive trade network.
• Regional engagement: Even within the region, countries like Iraq and Türkiye have initiated trade agreements to complement IMEC.

 

As an alternative to China’s BRI

• Reduction in trade costs: IMEC promises substantial economic advantages for India by dramatically reducing trade costs and transforming maritime logistics.
• Reduced vulnerability: The strategic network reduces vulnerability to potential disruptions, such as those that might occur in the Suez Canal.
• Opportunities for Foreign Direct Investment (FDI): IMEC also creates compelling opportunities for increased foreign direct investment.
• Strengthening diplomatic ties: By positioning itself as an alternative to the BRI, the corridor allows India to strengthen diplomatic tie with West Asian and European countries.

 

Better for the environment

• Impact on climate health: There are implications to the IMEC deal that could impact the earth’s climate health.
• India's role in Green Hydrogen Development: India has emerged as a significant player in green hydrogen development, positioning itself as a potential global leader in this emerging clean energy technology.
  1. The country has launched ambitious initiatives to develop green hydrogen as a strategic component of its energy transition and decarbonisation efforts.
• International collaboration and infrastructure: India is collaborating with international partners such as Germany and Japan.
  1. The country is developing infrastructure for green hydrogen production, storage, and transportation, which will help:
     • Reduce carbon emissions.
     • Decrease dependence on fossil fuel imports.
     • Create new job opportunities in emerging green technology sectors.
• Trump administration's role in diplomatic efforts: The Trump administration's role in facilitating the Abraham Accords proved instrumental in creating the diplomatic conditions that made IMEC possible.
  1. Former U.S. President Joe Biden has been a strong proponent of IMEC.
• Future of IMEC under New U.S. Leadership: Looking ahead, questions remain about IMEC’s future under potential new U.S. leadership.
  1. An intriguing factor is Mr. Trump’s warm personal relationship with Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi, which could prove significant for ongoing relations.
  2. Now that there is a peace agreement between Israel and Hamas, both leaders could facilitate the much-needed meeting of IMEC participants to discuss the next steps.

 

Conclusion

This endeavour transcends traditional infrastructure development; it represents a fundamental reimagining of regional economic cooperation that requires unprecedented levels of coordination among diverse stakeholders. The U.S. and India, as key architects of the corridor, must work closely to shepherd this project to completion, recognising both its economic significance and environmental implications for all participating countries.