Discussion Paper on the issues of students of oppressed sections in IITs and Central Universities

Tamil Nadu Untouchability Eradication Front | September 02, 2023 | Published Online

Central Educational Institutions (CEIs) are categorised as those educational institutions of higher learning that are set up, funded, or receive financial assistance from the Government of India. Numerous educational institutions which are run by multiple ministries and departments under the Government of India fall under this classification. This includes but is not limited to, institutions such as the Central Universities, IITs, IIMs, IISc, IISERs, AIIMSs, NITs, SPAs, IIITs, NIPERs, NIDs, ISIs, etc. Many of them are premier institutions in the fields of Science and technology, Medical Sciences, Management, Architecture, Design, Statistics, Humanities, Social Sciences, etc.

There are disturbing reports that Students of Oppressed Sections in IITs and Central Universities are undergoing undue pressure and stress due to caste-polluted atmosphere and discrimination in the abovementioned campuses. There are frequent reports of suicides also among the students. The faculty members of such institutions have also expressed similar issues in the public domain in the recent past. It has also been reported in the media about the serious underrepresentation of Students and Faculty from oppressed sections in some of these institutes.

We may focus on certain important issues and suggest remedial measures.
1) Implementation of Reservation in CEIs (Reservation in Admissions) 2006 Act and Reservations in CEIs (Reservation in Teacher’s Cadre) 2019 Act.
2) Functioning of SC ST cells.
3) Representation for SC STs in various committees.
4) Creating a congenial atmosphere within the campus and sensitisation.

Implementation of Reservation in CEIs (Reservation in Admissions) 2006 Act and Reservations in CEIs (Reservation in Teacher’s Cadre) 2019 Act.

Historically these institutes have seen drastic underrepresentation of students from oppressed sections. It was in 2006 that the Central Education Institutes (Reservation in Admissions) Act was passed in Parliament as part of the common minimum programme. The act mandates reservation of 15% to SCs, 7.5% to STs and 27% to OBCs in all the programmes offered by the CEIs. The enactment of the CEI Act 2006 attracted widespread protests from the Upper Caste students belonging to the higher education institutes. Since then, the implementation of the act in undergraduate courses has contributed to the democratisation of the campuses. However, in Post Graduate and research programs, we still see the institutions flouting the reservation norms codified in the act.

The reservation in teaching faculty posts was enacted as Central Education Institutes (Reservation in Teacher’s Cadre) Act, 2019. According to the CEI Act 2019, these Institutes are mandated to reserve teacher positions for different categories across all cadres as follows: 7.5% for ST, 15% for SC, and 27%. Teaching faculty posts were mostly filled by upper-caste candidates prior to 2019. For example, only 2.5% and 0.3% of the teaching faculty of the IITs belonged to the SCs and the STs, whereas the same for IIMs was only 1% and 0.2% according to the official figures submitted in the Parliament in 2019. All India Survey of Higher Education 2019-2020 figures show that only 6.7%, 1.6%, and 13% of the Institutions of National Importance teaching faculty belong to the SCs, STs, and OBCs. The Central Universities had only 10%, 6.6%, and 15% of their teachers from the SCs, STs, and OBCs. Many of them provided reservations for SCs, STs, and OBCs in teaching in the last decade only. Senior-level cadres were exempted from reservation in many disciplines, and even those few reserved posts were left unfilled and de-reserved after a year in institutions like the IITs.  Following the enactment of the Central Educational Institutions (Reservation in Teachers’ Cadre) Act-2019 (hereafter the Act) in July 2019, reservation for SCs, STs, OBCs, and EWS is applicable in direct recruitment to teaching posts in all cadre/grade of pay and in all disciplines of the CEIs. The reservation system laid out by this Act requires each institution to prepare rosters for all the teaching posts at the same cadre/grade of pay (Assistant Professors, Associate Professors, Professors, etc.) and recruit teachers to fill the roster points earmarked for each social category. The general principles for preparing the rosters were laid out by the office memorandums issued by the Department of Personnel and Training in 1997 and 2019.

Even after many years have passed since the CEI Act was passed, the reservation policies are yet to be fully implemented in premiere education institutes. According to the data tabled in the Rajya Sabha by the Ministry of Education in response to a question by Dr V Sivadasan, MP of the CPIM, only 2572 SC candidates, 9.3% of the total 27658 admissions, were admitted to the PhD programme in IITs over the last five years (2017-18 to 2021-22). Similarly, only 612 ST candidates (2.2% of the total) were admitted in the same time period. In IIMs over the last five years, of the total 757 PhD admissions, only 6.6% are SCs, 2% are STs, and 17.2% are OBCs. The Unreserved category accounts for more than 70 % of the admissions. Similar trends can be observed across various CFTIs (see Annexure 1). Except for very few institutions, all of them violated reservation policy. 

We observe similar trends in PhD admissions across the 5 years from 2017-18 to 2021-22, indicating a lack of commitment from the side of the institutions in following the rules laid down by the CEI Act, 2006. For example, in IITs, the share of SC candidates admitted to PhD programmes remained between 8.5 % to 9.9%, and the share of ST candidates admitted to PhD programmes remained between 2% to 2.4% in each of the five years.

Similar situation exists in the admission to MS programmes. It is observed from the admission statistics published by IIT Madras in their annual reports that, of the 2476 total MS admissions during the ten years from 2010-11 to 2019-20, only 6 ST and 69 SC were admitted. 

Usually, the reason cited by these institutions is the lack of quality applicants from the oppressed sections to these programmes. However, a closer examination of the admission procedure reveals that such claims are untrue. In February 2021, The Hindu newspaper published a series of articles indicating ‘PhD entry in IITs tougher for students from marginalised communities’, based on data obtained from IITs through Right to Information Act (RTI) requests. The article by Pon Vasanth argues that the acceptance rate (ratio of students admitted to the total number of applicants) in PhD admissions for SC (2.2%), ST (2.2%), and OBC (2.7%) candidates is less than that of unreserved candidates (4%). In an ideal case, if the institutes followed reservation norms properly, the acceptance rate for oppressed sections would have been at par or higher than that of the unreserved category. This refutes the claims of the institutes about the lack of candidates and points to a possible bias in the admission process. Recent data from the Rajya Sabha also indicates that the reservations were not fulfilled despite having enough applicants.

 The severe violations of reservation norms and the marginal representation of SC and ST categories in the research programs (PhD and MS) admissions in IITs and other CEIs follow significantly from the flawed process of PhD and MS admissions. The number of seats for admissions to the research programs at each of the departments or their social category-wise distribution is rarely notified by the institutes. In their absence, it cannot be concluded how many seats are reserved for the SC, ST and OBC candidates in each department, how many of those reserved get filled and how many seats in the open category are filled by SC, ST and OBC candidates.

Faculty Reservation

Even after three years of enacting the teaching faculty reservation, many CEIs, especially those focussing on Science, Technology, Engineering, and Management fields (STEM), are not implementing reservation in teaching posts. After representations and protests by various student organisations, political parties and Members of Parliament, the Ministry of Education asked institutions under it to improve the representation of the backward groups through special recruitment drives during the period September 5, 2021, to September 4, 2022, but this could not improve the situation in many such institutions due to several problems existing in the teaching faculty recruitment process. Data presented by the education minister in response to the question raised by S Venkatesan, MP from Madurai of the CPIM, in the Lok Sabha regarding the mission mode recruitment of teachers into different cadres indicates that of the 45 Central Universities, 33 had identified a total of 1,097 vacancies in these categories, of which just 212 were filled. Even among these 33 Universities, the data revealed that 18 of them had recruited no SC/ST/OBC teaching faculty at all despite having identified vacancies. Similarly a total of 76 SC, 23 ST and 138 OBC candidates were appointed in the IITs as part of the mission mode recruitment from 5th September 2021 to 4th September 2022.IITs Bhubaneswar, Hyderabad, and Bhilai have reported zero recruitment of candidates from SC/ST/OBC categories during this period. 13 of the IITs were not able to identify backlog vacancies to be filled during this process rest of the 10 IITs combined identified a mere 342 positions as backlog vacancies. This number is a gross underestimation of the actual backlog of vacancies since there were 4370 vacant faculty positions as of February 2022 according to another data presented in the Parliament.

This indicates the failure of the institutions to recruit an adequate number of teaching faculty through the Mission mode recruitment to fulfil the reservation norms.

The important problems to be addressed for the implementation of the Act are as follows:

1. Preparing reservation rosters is a primary step to be taken for implementing this Act, and it is particularly at this step that many of these institutions have faulted. Due to their preference to continue with the past practices and their ant-reservation mindset, separate rosters for separate cadres, comprising both the filled and vacant posts, are not getting prepared at these institutions.

2. Fixing cadre strength is another important aspect, as the Act and the Office Memorandums of the DoPT enjoin upon the institutions to specify the strength of their teachers’ cadres so that the number of roster points to be filled equals the strength of the cadre. However institutions such as the IITs have a flexible cadre system which does not specify the number of sanctioned posts at each cadre.

3. Proper advertising should be done, specifying the number of vacant seats for each social category in each cadre. Such important details are missing even in the advertisements for Special Recruitment Drives targeting applicants from SC/ST/OBC/EWS. Although the Act provides for reservation in senior cadres, due to inertia, many of the IITs, IIMs, IISERs, IISc, etc., have not held Special Recruitment Drives for senior cadres. The Joint Secretary & Financial Advisor of the Department of Higher Education had written to the department in September 2021 that the flexible cadre system in the IITs and the reservation system laid out by the Act are conflicting with each other. Since the flexible cadre system is only an internal feature of the institutions and it was not brought in through legislation or statutes under any legislation, the norms laid out by the Act should be upheld, and the flexible cadre system should be abolished in IITs and elsewhere.

4. Leaving reserved posts unfilled after the recruitment process

Across the CEIs, there is a tendency not to select reserved category candidates after conducting detailed recruitment processes such as shortlisting eligible candidates, interviewing, etc. Evidence for this situation, called the problem of None Found Suitable, is available for the Central universities, IITs, etc., from responses given in the Parliament. The Parliamentary Committee for the Welfare of SCs and STs has observed the prevalence of this problem at the AIIMSs. When this problem occurs alongside the lack of proper rosters, it results in the usurpation of posts that should have otherwise gone to the reserved category. During the period 2019 March-2021 August, IIT Jammu brought down its vacancies from 64.5% to 10% and 55 teachers out of the total 66 recruited belonged to the General category. Similarly, at IIT Delhi, it came down from 22% to 10%, and 108 teachers out of the total 117 recruited belonged to the General category. According to the replies received under the Right to Information Act 2019, during this period, out of the 1517 total teachers recruited by 21 IITs, 1280 teachers belonged to the General category.

Functioning of SC ST cells

The proper functioning of SC ST cells in higher education Institutes is imperative to ensure a safe space for students coming from oppressed sections. Currently, in many institutes, the scope of the SC ST cell is limited to a grievance redressal mechanism which acts only on a complaint or any untoward incident to the students. The scope of the SC ST cells should be expanded in accordance with the UGC guidelines to include monitoring and ensuring continued compliance with the reservation norms codified in CEI Act 2006 and CEI Act 2019. The SC ST cells should also be mandated to organise sensitisation programs for spreading awareness among students regarding the functioning of the body and other caste-related issues faced by students from oppressed sections. 

In response to a question by S Venkatesan MP in March 2023, the Ministry of Education said in Lok Sabha that SC/ST student cells do not exist in 21 CFTIs (including 4 IITs, 11 IIITs, and 6 NITs). The institutes without SC/ST student cells were not mentioned in the Minister of State for Education’s answer. Rather, it was mentioned that these institutes have set up other mechanisms such as Equal Opportunity Cell, Student Grievance Cell, Student Grievance Committee, Student Social Club, Liaison Officers, Liaison Committee etc., to address the issues faced by students from marginalised sections. However, whether the scope of these alternative mechanisms is similar to that of SC/ST student cells was not clear from the reply from the Minister of State in the Ministry of Education. Recently IIT Delhi has set up an SC ST cell in compliance with the UGC guidelines, which also includes sensitisation programs on caste-related issues. Institutes that do not have SC ST cells should follow suit adhering to the UGC guidelines.

Representation for SC STs in various committees

Currently, there are no guidelines which ensure the representation of members from oppressed sections in various committees in the central education institutes, such as the Internal Complaints Committee/CCASH (Complaints Committee Against Sexual Harassment), governing bodies of the institutes, Anti-Ragging cell, Grievance Redressal Cell, Wellness centres etc. Ensuring the representation of members from oppressed sections would create a conducive atmosphere for the students and staff from the oppressed sections to approach the respective committee/body more freely.

Creating a congenial atmosphere within the campus and sensitisation

Students from oppressed sections of society would have faced many challenges (social and economic) to get into the premier institutes of our country. Hence, it is important to understand, address and resolve the difficulties they might face in their academic and non-academic life on campuses. News reports and data coming from the campuses on issues such as harassment, Suicide and Dropout clearly show the obstacles and adversities faced by SC/ST/OBC students.

Data tabled in the Lok Sabha (Annexure 2) in 2021 shows that 68 students from oppressed communities had ended their lives in a span of seven years (2014-2021) in various central educational institutes. Among them, 58 students were from IITs, NITs and central universities. The SFI observed then that even this data is incomplete as some suicides that happened during the pandemic and away from the campuses were not included in the data. Recent data provided by the Ministry of Education in Rajya Sabha, in reply to Dr V Sivadasan MP’s question, shows the worsening scenario of higher education institutes. According to government statistics, fewer students have committed suicide in the COVID years (2020 to 2021), and the number has again steeply increased in 2022 to 24. In 2023, it is again reaching the worst scenario by losing the lives of 20 students while it is only halfway down the year. Despite other reasons as laid down by the government for the increasing number of suicides, no one can neglect the socio-economic factors behind that. 

An evident example of institutional murder is the suicide of Rohit Vemula in 2016, who was a PhD student at Hyderabad Central University. Rohit was a victim of attacks from a casteist and majoritarian university administration. Rohit had to give up his life after he and four other Dalit students were punished with an effective social boycott, being denied access to both academic and residential space on the campus. 

Another recent incident was the suicide of Darshan Solanki, a first-year B. Tech student at IIT Bombay. Darshan faced discrimination against his caste from his batchmates, leading him to end his life on campus. Despite his family’s allegations about the shaming and discrimination that Darshan was going through, the IIT Bombay administration held that no such incident of discrimination had happened in the case. Very recently, suicides of Dalit students have happened in IIT Delhi and IIT Hyderabad. 

In all the cases, the indifference of the institute administration towards student suicides is very much evident. Rather than trying to cover up such incidents of suicide, the institute administrations must show the responsibility to go for a thorough internal inquiry and to bring the truth to light. 

Another important issue to be addressed is the alarming number of dropouts of SC/ST/OBC students from central educational institutes. In July 2023, the minister of state for education, Subhas Sarkar, informed Rajya Sabha that A total of 25,593 students from the Schedule Castes (SC), Schedule Tribes (ST), Other Backward Classes (OBC), and minority groups have dropped out of central universities and the Indian Institutes of Technology (IITs) over the last five years. Data shows that most dropouts were from postgraduate and PhD programmes. The main reasons for the dropouts, as cited by the government, are offers for placement in public sector enterprises and personal preference for better opportunities elsewhere. Apart from the reasons cited by the government, the increase in academic and non-academic fees, the hike in living expenses, and the increase in the unemployment rate are also the reasons for the large number of dropouts in recent years.

The above-mentioned data on the situation regarding suicides and dropouts in the CEIs indicate the need for conscious efforts to create a congenial atmosphere for students and staff from the oppressed sections. There are previous instances where students and faculty have complained about direct and indirect forms of casteism in higher education institutes. The institutes must take appropriate actions to prevent such incidents, including sensitisation programmes.