'Fee cut order linked to IIM autonomy'

Petitioners present their locus standi to apex court

A 600-page affidavit on the autonomy of the Indian Institutes of Management (IIMs) and the human resources development ministry's fee cut order was filed with the Supreme Court today.

Submitting the affidavit, the petitioners of the public interest litigation (PIL) challenging the ministry's diktat said the fee controversy was an offshoot of the issue of autonomy granted to the IIMs.

The affidavit tries to prove the locus standi of the petitioners in the case and also mentions the ministry's definition on who should control the IIMs. This was stated in an affidavit filed earlier by a ministry official with Calcutta High Court.

Sandeep Parekh, a visiting faculty of IIM-Ahmedabad, Saikat Sengupta, graduate of the institute and Anish Mathew, a management graduate from IIM-Bangalore, had filed the PIL in the wake of the fee cut order.

"The issue of autonomy was so important for these institutions that they were deliberately set up as registered societies and not through an Act of Parliament. The fee cut order is a means to seize the autonomy of the IIMs from the registered societies and their Board of Governors," said the affidavit.

Expressing concern that the autonomy of the IIMs might be impinged following the government order, the petitioners said, "The order encroaches upon the autonomy in two ways -- first, by unilaterally deciding upon a drastic fee cut without consulting the IIM managements, and second, the funding of funds deficit will increase the hold of the government on these institutions." The government had said it would provide adequate funds to make up the deficit because of lower fees.

The affidavit, containing annextures like the annual reports of IIM-Bangalore, IIM-Indore and IIM-Kozhikode and letters exchanged between the government and the IIMs, also attached an earlier affidavit filed by Bharat Singh, under secretary of the HRD ministry with the Calcutta High Court, last year.

The ministry official, appearing as a government representative, had said, "IIM-Calcutta is a registered society under the Society Registration Act and not a body constituted under Statute. The management of the institute is vested with the Board of Governors as per rules and it is denied that the central and the state government can have deep pervasive control over policy matters and the management of the affairs of the institute."

This affidavit contradicts the ministry's present stand on autonomy and fee cut.

To prove their locus standi in the case, the petitioners said, "The petitioners are vitally interested as citizens and as persons associated with these organisations in the quality of education in IIMs being maintained and to prevent the respondents from acting in a manner prejudicial to these fine institutions they are associated with."

"So far as our locus is concerned, it is submitted that the three petitioners can not be described as meddlesome interlopers," added the affidavit.