India’s public university system is facing a slow but profound institutional erosion. What appears today as an acute crisis is, in fact, the culmination of decades of structural neglect, political interference, and academic abdication across governments. The concern is no longer about decline alone, but about whether the very idea of a university — as an autonomous space for learning, debate, and knowledge creation — is being hollowed out.
How the decline became structural, not episodic
The weakening of public universities did not begin overnight. State universities entered crisis as early as the 1960s, marked by chronic underfunding, political interference, and administrative drift. Over time, these pressures spread to central universities, which were once seen as insulated from local politics.
A decisive turning point came during UPA-II, when excessive centralisation was presented as reform. Governance became more bureaucratic, regulatory control tightened, and autonomy weakened. Yet, despite these pressures, universities continued to function — unevenly but resiliently — sustained by institutional memory, committed teachers, and motivated students.
Expansion without quality and the missed opportunity
The massive expansion of higher education focused overwhelmingly on access. Quality assurance, pedagogical reform, and faculty development remained secondary. This created strain, but it also brought a more diverse student body into universities.
Unlike the strike-ridden campuses of the 1970s, many students were aspirational and keen to learn. Economic growth raised the cost of academic failure. Despite uneven faculty quality, strong teachers still shaped classrooms. Universities retained a degree of freedom — an informal autonomy that allowed debate, dissent, and intellectual risk-taking.
That fragile equilibrium has now collapsed.
Breakdown of administrative norms and institutional trust
Recent events, such as the removal of multiple vice-chancellors in Rajasthan following student protests, highlight a deeper institutional breakdown. Basic procedural norms — such as appointing inquiry officers senior to those being investigated — are being ignored when politically inconvenient.
This erosion of due process has weakened the authority of university offices and replaced rule-based governance with discretionary power. Once administrative neutrality collapses, universities become vulnerable to capture by external political forces.
Student politics and the rise of partisan veto power
Student unions have always played a role in campus life, often serving as training grounds for democratic engagement. However, the current phase marks a qualitative shift. Across many public universities, the ABVP is widely perceived to exercise an effective veto over institutional functioning.
Pre-censorship of speakers, cancellations of academic events, and fear-driven compliance have become routine. Allegations in some states go further, suggesting that student politics has become a conduit for political pressure and extortion.
This phenomenon is not entirely new. Similar domination by party-affiliated student bodies occurred earlier under different political dispensations, notably in West Bengal. What is unprecedented is the national scale and uniformity of this pattern.
How partisanship erased the ‘student’ and the ‘teacher’
The deeper tragedy lies in how partisan politics hollowed out the very constituencies meant to defend universities. Student unions became pathways to political careers rather than vehicles to safeguard academic interests. Teachers’ unions, similarly party-affiliated, lost their capacity to act as collective academic voices.
As a result:
- Students and teachers survived as individuals, not as institutional actors.
- The category of the “student” as an academic stakeholder disappeared from public discourse.
- Academic excellence ceased to be a shared collective demand.
This structural silencing ensured that when universities came under sustained assault, there was no unified academic resistance.
From imperfect autonomy to institutional dystopia
Even universities long criticised for complacency — such as Delhi University and JNU — now face unprecedented control. Accounts from campuses describe:
- Faculty forced to submit papers months in advance for ideological vetting.
- Students hesitant to organise seminars or discussions.
- Pressure to attend politically sponsored events.
- A sharp decline in the quality and credibility of academic appointments.
Pedagogical reform has been replaced by administrative standardisation. Entrance reforms like CUET function as exam-management systems rather than educational solutions. Vice-chancellors increasingly behave as political enforcers rather than academic leaders.
Silence, domestication, and the loss of the university ideal
Perhaps the most alarming feature of the current moment is silence. Campuses that once erupted over minor administrative decisions now appear subdued. The public university has been domesticated into compliance.
This transformation is often justified in the name of “Bharatiya tradition”, yet it contradicts India’s historical respect for spaces of learning — where power was expected to disarm at the threshold of knowledge. The reversal is stark: authority now enters the university fully armed, encountering little resistance.
What to note for Prelims?
- Public universities face governance, funding, and autonomy challenges.
- Student and teacher unions are often party-affiliated in India.
- CUET standardises admissions but does not address pedagogy.
- University autonomy is central to academic freedom.
What to note for Mains?
- Critically examine the impact of political interference on higher education governance.
- Discuss how partisan student politics affects academic autonomy.
- Analyse the consequences of centralisation in university administration.
- Suggest reforms to restore institutional autonomy and academic accountability.
