In a significant move impacting the landscape of higher education, the Supreme Court of India has ordered a nationwide audit of all private and deemed universities. This directive compels the Union government, all States and Union Territories, and the University Grants Commission (UGC) to provide comprehensive disclosures regarding the establishment, regulation, and monitoring of these institutions.
The court's order mandates the submission of detailed affidavits outlining the foundation, management, and operational specifics of each private, non-government, and deemed university in the country. These affidavits, personally affirmed by high-ranking officials such as the Cabinet Secretary for the Centre, Chief Secretaries for States/UTs, and the Chairman of the UGC, must disclose the legal basis under which each university was established and detail any benefits they have received, including land allotments, financial or administrative concessions, and preferential treatment. The court has stated that any attempt to suppress, misrepresent or withhold facts would be dealt with strictly.
This landmark decision arose from a petition filed by Ayesha Jain, a former student of Amity University, Noida, who alleged harassment and obstruction in updating her records after legally changing her name. Jain claimed she was barred from attending classes and prevented from taking exams after the university refused to acknowledge her name change, despite her having completed the necessary legal formalities.
Initially, the court addressed the issue as a specific grievance, summoning the chairman and vice-chancellor of the trust behind Amity University. However, after reviewing their affidavits, the court broadened the scope of the inquiry, recognizing systemic issues concerning governance, regulation, and transparency within private higher education institutions across India. The court observed that the circumstances pointed to possible arbitrary and discriminatory practices, and broader governance failures.
The Supreme Court's scrutiny extends to various aspects of these universities' operations. It seeks information on who controls and manages these institutions, including the composition and selection process of their governing bodies. The court is also demanding operational data related to admissions policies, faculty recruitment procedures, compliance mechanisms, grievance redressal systems, and remuneration practices.
Furthermore, the audit will examine whether institutions claiming "no profit, no loss" status adhere to this principle in practice. The court will assess if funds are being diverted to founders, family members, or unrelated assets, scrutinizing salaries, benefits, and expenditures that may fall outside the academic sphere. The UGC has been directed to clarify its regulations for these universities and how it enforces them, including the checks, audits, and monitoring systems in place.
The Supreme Court's intervention reflects growing concerns about the functioning and regulation of private universities in India. Previous instances, such as the striking down of the Chhattisgarh Private Universities Act in 2005 and a 2009 review identifying 44 deemed universities as unfit, highlight the need for greater oversight. A 2017 verdict also invalidated engineering degrees awarded through unapproved distance education by deemed universities.
The next hearing is scheduled for January 8, 2026, where the court will examine the submitted disclosures in detail. This audit signifies a critical step towards ensuring accountability, transparency, and adherence to regulatory standards within India's private higher education sector.
