SC ruling on AICTE: PGDM institutes wish to remain in AICTE ambit

Add Review

MBAUniverse.com News Desk |
May 20, 2013
In the aftermath of recent Supreme Court decision restricting AICTE role regarding MBA programmes to 'advisory only', representatives from over 40 leading PGDM institutes in India under EPSI met in New Delhi and deliberated on future strategy.
PGDM Institutes seek some relief from MHRD and AICTE to help them become more competitive in a rapidly changing scenario
In a meeting held under the aegis Education Promotion Society for India (EPSI) in New Delhi on May 19, representatives from 40 leading management institutes have resolved that AICTE must continue to monitor and regulate management education system. However, the institutes have sought some relief from MHRD and AICTE to help them become more competitive in a rapidly changing scenario. EPSI will be making a representation to MHRD, and will also be engaging with AICTE to help the sector grow.
 
The Sunday meeting was called by EPSI for discussing the implications of the recent verdict of the Supreme Court on the role of AICTE in management education. It was attended by more than 40 deans and directors. The meeting was presided over by Dr. Pritam Singh, Former Director IIM Lucknow, and currently Director General, IMI. Legal experts were also part of the deliberations. After consultations with the legal experts associated with EPSI, it was resolved that the recent verdict of Supreme Court was applicable only to MBA and MCA programmes of affiliated colleges. It does not change status of the autonomous PGDM programmes approved by the AICTE.
 
Recently on April 25, Supreme Court had passed a judgment stating AICTE approval is not required for private colleges running University-approved MBA programmes as role of the statutory body regarding MBA programmes is restricted to ‘advisory only’. MHRD is believed to be pursuing legal alternatives to amend the AICTE ACT to get around this impasse. However, the process is expected to involve ratification from the Parliament, and hence is expected to take time. Meanwhile, the 300 odd Institutes were unclear of the impact of this judgment on their functioning.
 
Directors were of the view that PGDM institutions will continue to work under regulatory framework of the AICTE Act 1987. Echoing the sentiments, Dr. Pritam Singh said, “Indian MBA education needs a regulator to check the unscrupulous institutes. We are not against AICTE. If there is no regulator, we will see rampant commercialization and mushrooming. However the regulator should create enabling conditions for good institutes to flourish.” 
 
At the meeting, PGDM institutes called for autonomy to perform. It was also decided in the meeting that in view of the robust growth of quality management education under the PGDM institutions, the autonomy in deciding curriculum, making admission on merit, deciding the overall quality and fee and recruiting qualified faculty should remain within the operational domain of PGDM institutions.
 
The dean and directors of leading PGDM institutions expressed their concern about certain inflexible regulatory practices of the AICTE which are hampering the smooth working of management institutions. They had particularly drawn attention to the practice of yearly renewal of the approval by the AICTE. Even very old and reputed institutions like XLRI, SP Jain, MDI, IMI, IMT and BIMTECH, have to submit voluminous reports for this purpose every year.
 
Dr. H. Chaturvedi, Alternate President, EPSI, said, “In view of dire need of the internationalization of management education, good private b-schools need to be helped by the AICTE, through liberal research grants, assistance in faculty development and in getting international accreditation.  PGDM institutions could speedily innovate and improve the quality of their programmes due to the autonomy enjoyed by them. In almost all b-schools ranking, the top 90 percent rankings have always been occupied by PGDM institutions, which validates the vibrancy of the autonomous programmes.”
 
Deans and directors of PGDM institutions have also decided to approach the Supreme Court in July/ August, 2013 for giving a final verdict in the Case No. 92/2011 (EPSI, AIMS and Jaipuria Group Vs. AICTE). Already the apex court has issued three interim orders which disallow AICTE’s Notification dated December 28, 2010.

Stay tuned to MBAUniverse.com for more news and updates on PGDM institutions in India.