Context:

The role of Governors as Chancellors of State universities in India has sparked debates, particularly due to its increasing politicization.

• Originally designed to protect universities from political influence, this role has now become a source of political interference.

Historical Background:

• The position of Governor as Chancellor was inherited from British colonial rule.
• In 1857, the British established the first three universities (Calcutta, Bombay, and Madras) and appointed Governors as Chancellors to maintain control.
• Governors were granted significant powers:
• Appointing Vice-Chancellors
• Nominating members to university bodies
• Presiding over convocations
• Approving delegated legislation under university law
• After independence, this model continued without reassessing its relevance in a democratic and federal India, causing political tensions over time.

The Politicisation of the Governor’s Role:

• Between 1947-1967, Governors played a ceremonial role due to Congress dominance at the Centre and States.
• After 1967, as non-Congress parties took power in many states, Governors began to assume a more political role.
• This led to several governance issues:
• Delays in Appointments: Governors sometimes delayed Vice-Chancellor appointments, causing administrative paralysis.
• Conflicts with State Governments: Governors, acting on central government directives, frequently clashed with state governments.

The Dual Role of Governors: Constitutional vs. Statutory Powers

• Governors hold:
• Constitutional Powers: Acting on the advice of the Council of Ministers (Article 163).
• Statutory Powers: Acting independently as Chancellor, bypassing the state government in university matters.
• The dual role creates tensions, particularly in opposition-ruled states, as Governors can make unilateral decisions affecting universities.

Comparing the Governor’s Role with the President’s:

• The President acts as the Visitor for central universities, consulting with the Ministry of Education and laying university statutes before Parliament.
• In contrast, Governors often act unilaterally, bypassing the state government, particularly in opposition-led states, leading to governance issues.

Challenges in the Current System:

• Political Interference: Governors often prioritize central government interests over university autonomy.
• Dual Authority System: Creates confusion and conflict between the state government and university leadership.
• Lack of Academic Expertise: Many Governors lack the academic background to manage universities effectively.
• Delays in Decision-Making: Political disagreements result in delays in appointments, recruitment, and academic programs.

Proposed Reforms: A Move Towards Academic Independence:

• Several commissions have recommended reforms:
• Rajamannar Committee (1969-71): Governors should act on the advice of state governments in statutory functions.
• Sarkaria Commission (1983-88): Governors should consult with Chief Ministers while retaining independent judgment.
• M.M. Punchhi Commission (2007-10): The Governor’s role should be limited to constitutional duties, with an academic or neutral figure appointed as Chancellor.

Alternative Models of Chancellor Appointment:

• Governor as Ceremonial Chancellor: Removes the Governor’s discretionary powers, reducing the role to ceremonial. Adopted by states like Gujarat, Karnataka, and Maharashtra.
• Chief Minister as Chancellor: The Chief Minister holds the role, as proposed in West Bengal and Punjab.
• State-Appointed Chancellor: The state government appoints an academic or public figure as Chancellor, implemented in Telangana.
• Elected Chancellor by University Bodies: Universities elect their Chancellor from faculty and alumni, ensuring independence from political influence.