Hands off

One of the abiding problems in India has been the over-arching reach of politics into private domains.

The Supreme Court recognised this issue in the field of education recently by clarifying that the government's rules on reservations in educational institutions could not be extended to private, unaided schools and colleges.

The political class has responded as if stung, and the Tamil Nadu chief minister has even threatened to take over all private colleges in her state.

That of course begs the question, because if the government had the wit to run enough colleges to feed the latent demand, on the concessional terms that it offers all students, there would be precious little room for private colleges to proliferate""as they have been doing.

The fact is that the country's enormous hunger for higher education has not been met by the government establishment; for every student who gets admission into an Indian Institute of Technology or Regional Engineering College, thousands are turned away after entrance examinations.

Enlightened state governments, especially in the southern states, have recognised this unmet demand and the resulting frustration, and therefore allowed and even encouraged the setting up of private educational establishments, most of them in the engineering and medical fields but also extending to education in law, business management and other specialisations.

In recent years these have multiplied in number and now turn out the thousands of engineers who make possible the rapid growth of India's software companies, and the MBA students who help professionalise company managements.

Not all these educational bodies have the required facilities and staff, or a good reputation, and some clearly charge too much for what they offer.

But this is a reflection of pent-up demand, and as supply has grown to match demand, the market has begun to differentiate. The point is that the market has provided a solution where governments have failed.

Some sense of balance and perspective is therefore in order. Governments at the Centre and in the states are perfectly within their rights to run schools and colleges and to practise seat reservation""which, after all, is an idea blessed by the Constitution.

Where private schools and colleges take help from the government (in the form of concessional land, or financial aid), the government is once again within its rights to demand adherence to its reservation policy.

But in the same way that private companies are not subject to this reservation policy, unaided private educational bodies too should be exempt.

Politicians are right to be concerned about educational opportunities for the socially handicapped, but governments have large education budgets with which to expand the reach of public education; that is why people are now paying a substantial education cess.

And if public management of schools and colleges does not deliver good results, there is always scope for public-private partnership (as Delhi has shown in government schools).

What needs to be recognised is that many educational institutions want to stay away from corrupt officials who man the state education departments; that is why they do not adopt the easy option of accepting financial aid from the government.

There should be scope in a free society for such private endeavour, especially when it involves a social good. The court was right in what it said, and politicians should correctly respond by looking at ways to improve the quality, scope and reach of public education. That is what will lead to positive outcomes.