For several reasons August 2005 is likely to prove a watershed month in the history of Indian education. On August 12 in Inamdar vs. State of Maharashtra (Appeal 5041 of 2005) a seven-judge bench of the Supreme Court of India upheld a previous judgement of an 11-judge bench of the apex court in T. M. A Pai Foundation vs. State of Karnataka & Ors (2002 8 SCC 481), in which it had ruled that the practice of state governments appropriating 50-65 percent quotas for ‘merit’ and other government sponsored students for admission into private unaided colleges of professional education (at tuition fees determined by their own committees) is illegal. Despite the learned justices of the apex court having delivered detailed, logical and commonsense reasons why state governments cannot interfere with the right of citizens to establish and administer education institutions of their choice, the political class long accustomed to appropriating and passing off substantial capacity in privately promoted, financially independent colleges of professional education (medicine, engineering, business management etc) as their own, are up in arms against the judgement in Inamdar’s Case. In Parliament as well as in all the state capitals there’s unanimous demand for legislation (see pages 9 and 12 in this issue) to overrule the court’s verdict, prompting an angry outburst from Chief Justice Lahoti and a possible confrontation between Parliament and the judiciary. By a curious happenstance, the Supreme Court’s historic judgement has coincided with the release to the public of the report of a CABE (Central Advisory Board of Education) committee constituted to give teeth to the Free and Compulsory Education Bill 2004. This Bill was drafted to give effect to the landmark 86th amendment (2002) to the Constitution which made it mandatory (under the provisions of a new Article 21A) for the State to provide free and compulsory education to all children in the age group six-14. Chaired by Union minister of state for science and technology and ocean development Kapil Sibal who is a heavyweight Supreme Court counsel in his own right, the committee has inter alia recommended a reservation of 25 percent of pre-primary and class I capacity in all schools — including private schools — for children from ‘disadvantaged groups’ and deprived households in the neighbourhood. In effect the Sibal Committee has recommended a government quota in private, financially independent schools. Is this recommendation the thin end of a wedge which will enable incremental government interference in the administration and operations of India’s estimated 75,000 private schools which have attained global reputation for delivering high quality secondary education? That’s the subject matter of our cover story set against the backdrop of the apex court’s historic August 12 judgement. And in the special report feature our Lucknow-based correspondent Vidya Pandit highlights the dangers posed to higher education by India’s archaic system of colleges being affiliated to parent universities which have ballooned to unmanageable proportions. This issue of EducationWorld is also historic for us. With our circulation and readership having risen substantially, we can now…
