Link to Us

To link to this page from your website, simply cut and paste the following code to your web page.

It will appear on your page as

NEWS

The IIM-A has pleaded that the govt's move to cut the fees has violated the time-honoured process of the fee being decided by the board of governors of the business school.

The Indian Institute of Management, IIM, Ahmedabad, today filed an affidavit before the Supreme Court opposing the "unilateral" decision of the HRD Ministry to drastically reduce the fees. It said that the move violates the time-honoured process of the fee being decided by the board of governors of the business school.     

The premier institute said, "It's not necessary to reduce fees to achieve the stated objective of making management education more affordable to the less well-to-do sections of the society.     

We strongly feel that a notification of fee reduction from the ministry is an incorrect solution to the affordability problem. It subsidises rich students who can easily afford the current fee of Rs 1.5 lakhs per annum."      

In its affidavit, it said the fee reduction order has to be seen not in isolation, but in the larger context of many other decisions by the ministry that have threatened the autonomy of the institute.

It is believed that IIM-C Faculty Council and IIM-B are likely to follow IIM-A to the Supreme Court soon.

Source: PTI

   [Tell-a-Friend]                                                                   [Top]

You can sign an online petition against the interference by the government in the IIMs, and for autonomy and excellence in the IIMs at:

http://www.petitiononline.com/IIMPIL/petition.html

   [Tell-a-Friend]                                                                    [Top]

In the last Hearing on 08 April the Supreme Court issued a notice to all the IIMs to appear in court. 

In the next hearing, on 16th April, the court will first hear the views of the IIMs followed by arguments on the locus of the Petitioners before proceeding further. 

According to Mr. Sandeep Parekh, one of the petitioners : 

"At the outset the judges wanted to see the affidavit filed by the Petitioners and the various documents. They informed us that the registry had not sent the documents to them and therefore they were unable to read the same. They also wanted to know the stand of the various IIMs on the issues raised in the Petition. Chief Justice of India also asked us to keep the two issues of autonomy and fee cut separate and wanted arguments on both of these. Counsel for the HRD Ministry stated that no notice could be issued since the Petitioners had no standing. He also said that since five of the six IIMs have decided to implement the fee cut and the sixth IIM at Ahmedabad wanted to discuss the matter further, therefore this Petition should be dismissed. Counsel for the Petitioners Mr. Harish Salve stated in reply that there was no issue of the locus as all the three Petitioners were closely connected to the IIMs as visiting faculty, student and alumnus. 

We pointed out that for the purposes of getting the views of the IIMs we had filed an application for impleadment. We pointed out that necessary affidavit and documents had been filed. The court after hearing both sides has adjourned the matter to Friday the 16th of April 2004. In the meanwhile they issued notice to all the IIMs in the impleadment application filed by us. After hearing the view of the IIMs the court will hear the arguments on the locus of the Petitioners before proceeding further. The matter would now come up for hearing on the 16th of April 2004."

   [Tell-a-Friend]                                                                  [Top]

IIM-C Faculty Revolt Against Fee Cut Decision

Protesting against IIM-C Chairman YC Deveshwar's decision to accept the govt imposed fee cut in a unanimous resolution IIM-C faculty said,"Mr. Deveshwar has talked about moving forward in his resolution. The point to consider is whether this move forward is in the reverse direction". 

Lambasting Deveshwar, the resolution also states," It leaves us therefore with no option but to conclude that Mr. Deveshwar has taken care of one stakeholder only and that is MHRD. In doing so he has shown little concern for other stakeholders, tolerated infringement of the authority of the Board and presided over a Governing Body meeting of which the legality is in serious question.".

    Download a copy of IIM-C Faculty Resolution (2 pages) (pdf, 248 KB)

   [Tell-a-Friend]                                                                   [Top]

West Bengal State Govt. Finds IIM-C Fee Cut Decision Unacceptable : Writes to MHRD 

In a strongly worded letter to MHRD, the West Bengal govt has also questioned the legality of the IIM-C fee cut decision, " we are under the impression that the the entire issue of revision of fee is under consideration in the Supreme Court, and if so, the matter would be 'sub-judice'. This would further imply that further deliberation on the issue is not appropriate...".

The letter further says,"prior approval of the state govt. is a necessary pre-requisite for the adoption/amendment of any bye-laws that are legitimately required for fixing of fees and other charges".

    Download Page 1 of the Letter (pdf, 456 KB)

    Download Page 2 of the Letter (pdf, 439 KB)

   [Tell-a-Friend]                                                                   [Top]

IIM Fee Cut :  US Professor files PIL

Vipin Gupta, a US based IIM-A gold medallist has filed a PIL challenging the legality of the fee cut. Gupta, a Wharton Ph. D., Shashi Bhushan Singh (IIM-B, 2003) and Kamal Sharma (IIM-A 1973) have asked for a stay on the implementation of the fee cut order.

The case is due for hearing on 8th April.

    Download a copy of the Writ Petition  (pdf, 173 KB)

   [Tell-a-Friend]                                                                   [Top]

In the last hearing, the Supreme Court had agreed that the IIMs can also be included as parties to the PIL. Accordingly an applicatio has been filed for inclusion of all IIMs as co-petitioners.

    Download a copy of the Application  (pdf, 180 KB)

   [Tell-a-Friend]                                                                   [Top]

PIL:  Another Affidavit Filed

Another affidavit giving the details of the 'locus' of the persons who had filed the PIL and the accounts of the IIMs was filed today, 02 April 2004.  IIM-L, incidentally, has not responded to the letter asking for the accounts !    

    Download a copy of the Affidavit  (pdf, 312 KB)

   [Tell-a-Friend]                                                                   [Top]

IIM-A Releases White Paper on 'Sustaining Academic Excellence'

The IIM-A position paper, as expected, highlights the negative impact of the fee cut but, also mentions accountability of the Institute. The paper shows that the fee is only 11% of the average starting salary of the graduates, far less when compared to the business schools in the US.  More...

    Download IIM-A White Paper (pdf, 312 KB)

   [Tell-a-Friend]                                                                   [Top]

The SC order in the  PIL hearing against the fee cut and interference in the functioning of the IIMs states," When the case was taken up today, learned Additional Solicitor General accepted the notice of the application and stated that the Central Government is unable to give any undertaking except what the statement was recorded on 27th February, 2004.  Since there is a controversy in regard to giving an undertaking by the Central Government, we recall the order dated 27th February, 2004." 

 It further adds, "Consequently, the order dated 16th February, 2004, is revived.  The petitioners may now file an affidavit alongwith the other documents, as directed earlier.  Shri Harish N. Salve, learned senior counsel further prayed that he may also be permitted to implead all IIMs.  He may do so by filing interlocutory application."

Next date of hearing is scheduled for 8th April.

    Download a copy of the Supreme Court order  (pdf, 98 KB)

IIMB faculty also decide to express themselves. Their  resolution says, " The faculty is fully committed to academic excellence, performance, social responsibility and contemporary relevance. This will continue to be the Institute’s focus in the years to come. We believe that this can best be achieved by preserving the financial, administrative and academic autonomy of IIMB. We have full confidence that the Board, as the body responsible for the effective governance of this institution, will represent the cause of this Institute with the Government of India. We believe that higher education in general and business education in particular, is a specialized field that is changing fairly rapidly. To excel in this environment, governance should be in the hands of people who are constantly in touch with these changes and have a stake in keeping up and even staying ahead of them. Hence autonomy is essential.

Also, ""We believe in good conscience that we cannot favour greater subsidy to all students. Only the economically weakest should be considered for this, and IIMB is already doing that. We recommend that all students pay the fee determined by the Board to IIMB. However, if MHRD or any other Ministry or Department in GOI wishes to provide any additional subsidy, it can directly remit subsidies to admitted students or route these through IIMB."

The faculty have recommended two possible courses of action:

"1. GOI funds capital expenditure for major PGP/doctoral program expansions, for library/computer acquisitions, and funds doctoral programs operational expenditure. IIMB will meet all its operational funds requirement on its own with a clear caveat that no student has to reject an offer or discontinue education because of lack of finances. IIMB will continue to provide targeted financial aid as at present."

        "2 The Board of IIMB takes charge of its finances including funding of capital expenditure. Faculty will be glad to help the Board raise finances."

         The faculty also said, "We believe that the current system has worked well in the past and can do even better in the future. We have built a platform from which we can aspire to be a leading school globally. Our concern with the series of recommendations of the MHRD including most recently, the fee-reduction, is that though well intentioned, they will weaken us as an institution and act as a stumbling block in our on going efforts to build IIMB as an institution of global excellence that the country can be proud of."

    Download a copy of the IIMB Faculty resolution and recommendations to the Board of Governors  (pdf, 125 KB)

[Tell-a-Friend]                                                               [Top]

Today in the PIL hearing  against the fee cut and interference in the functioning of the IIMs, the MHRD  lawyers refused to give an undertaking that there will be no interference in the functioning of the IIMs. This led to the court accepting the PIL for hearing. The court has also directed that the IIMs can be included as parties to the PIL

The three-member bench of the Supreme Court comprising of Chief Justice V N Khare, Justice S B Sinha and Justice S H Kapadia cancelled the order of 27th February and revived the PIL. An earlier order of 16th Feb asking Petitioners to furnish documents also stands revived. The Court also observed that the Petitioners were at liberty to,"implead the IIMs as parties and can move an application to that effect".

When the PIL was first heard in the court, the govt. had assured that that there will be no interference in the functioning of the IIMs and the shortfall due from the fee cut will be provided for. This assurance had formed the basis of the court's decision to dispose the PIL.

Today's hearing was conducted because the Petitioners had pointed out that these two undertakings given in court by the govt. were not reflected in the SC order disposing off the PIL.  They had requested for inclusion of these assurances in the court's order.

The petitioners had also requested that the PIL be restored in case these undertakings were not forthcoming from the Ministry.

 In the last hearing, the lawyers for the government sought more time to clarify its position on the oral undertakings made by them in the court on 27th Feb regarding preservation of the autonomy and the guarantee to meet the shortfall arising out of the fee cut.

Today's Supreme Court order is a great blow to MHRD's case. Can all the king's men and horses put Humpty Dumpty together again ?

Register for our newswire to read the entire Supreme Court order

[Tell-a-Friend]                                                                [Top]

         The PIL hearing is scheduled for 19 March in the Supreme Court. It is matter number 23 in Court No. 1. Likely to be heard around 11.00 am.

If you will like to know the outcome immediately, as it happens, email us your contact number. 

        [Tell-a-Friend]                                                                [Top]

Enough is Enough :  IIM Calcutta Joins the Fray

         IIM Calcutta faculty have also decided to voice their opinion.  In a recent   resolution the IIMC faculty, "expressed its deep anguish at repeated attempts of the MHRD to interfere with the autonomy of the IIMs in general and IIMC in particular". 

         The Faculty Council has prepared a position paper: IIMC: Some Concerns About its Future. This document primarily focusses on the discussion around the Fees Cut -- the different ramifications of the decision on society at large, on student intake, on resource generation, and most importantly on the autonomy of the Institute.

         The arguments are based on data on the socio-economic background (and other factors) of the students admitted to the Institute since 1991. The fees were first raised in 1993 in the context of the Government's revised pattern of funding order, wherein IIMC (together with IIMA and IIMB) was asked to generate its own resources and reduce its dependence on government funding. The position paper has also analyzed the financial management of different aspects of the Institute for last ten years.

In this meeting the Faculty Council expressed its strong opinion against the interference by the Government.

       Download a Copy of the Position Paper Prepared by IIMC Faculty      (pdf, 184 KB)

       Technical Note on the Position Paper     (pdf, 57 KB)

             Tables and Charts Supporting the Position Paper     (xls, 131 KB)

      [Tell-a-Friend]                                                                  [Top]

Supreme Court re-admits PIL     

 HRD Ministry Threatens to Dismiss Society Members of IIM-Ahmedabad, Including the Director

       The Human Resources Development ministry has threatened to dismiss the IIM-Ahmedabad Society members, including its director, Bakul Dholakia, if they try to seek judicial action against the fee cut.

       During the meeting on Tuesday Society the members had discussed taking legal action against the fee cut.

       It is reported the Joint Secretary MHRD, Mr. VS Pandey, told the Society that the government had far reaching powers, and that seeking judicial settlement  amounted to confrontation with the government.

       He is also believed to have said that the government can supersede or  dismiss the Society - and that all hike in fees is illegal as no by-laws have been  framed. in the last 40 years to the government ! :-)

       Incidentally, the other HRD Ministry rep was financial advisor V Piparsania.

       The ministry is reported to have said that action will be initiated against the  Director for not keeping the Society well informed about the government's  thinking on this issue.

Subscribe to our Newswire for details of the IIM-A Society member you can contact for the inside story

      [Tell-a-Friend]                                                                    [Top]

Download a Copy of the PIL filed by Mr. Sandeep Parekh

           Mr. Parekh, an advocate at P.H. Parekh & Co., holds an LL.M. in Securities and Financial Regulations. He is also licensed to practice in New York.

        Synopsis (pdf, 143 KB)

        Writ Petition (pdf, 214 KB)

        Interim Relief Application (pdf, 86 KB)

        Annexures (pdf, 644 KB)

       Supreme Court Order at the Hearing of 27 Feb 2004 (pdf, 46 KB)

 

        [Tell-a-Friend]                                                                  [Top]

   
         The Hands off IIMs Initiative 

             We are a community of Indian Institute of Management (IIM) Faculty, Students and Alumnus who have got together in helping to maintain the autonomy of these oases of excellence.

              The Public Interest Litigation (PIL) was filed by the members of our community.

        [Tell-a-Friend]                                                                  [Top]