Supreme Court Orders Nationwide Audit of All Private Universities After Amity’s Harassment Over Student’s Name Change

This battle led by a student brought nationwide transformation.

The Supreme Court has ordered a massive audit of all the private universities in India in a landmark move that is to revolutionize the higher education scenario in India. This is an unprecedented step following a valiant struggle against Amity University by one student who revealed the presence of a great systemic corruption. Ayesha Jain is a young MBA student who battled the university management when the university declined to change her name in their records. Initially, her fight was a personal complaint but it has now escalated into a national movement of transparency and accountability.

The tale began when the girl who was once called Khushi Jain legally changed her name and declared it in the official government gazette. Amity University, even after all the legal processes that she took according to the Indian law, is suspected not to acknowledge her new identity. The university administration allegedly harassed her and denied her permission to attend classes instead of coming to her side as a student. She even made fun of herself by adopting a Muslim name, which made the administrative failure even more uncomfortable with discrimination.

Ayesha also wasted one academic year since the university could not accommodate her to take examinations under her legal name. She turned to the Supreme Court to receive justice since the university and regulatory authorities failed to respond. In her petition, she described how the university was rigid and insensitive toward her mentally and hence she had lost her academic life. The judges were not only interested in what they discovered in the hearings but in a symptom of a much greater issue with the private education.

In the court hearings, the Supreme Court stage made it very clear that they were not pleased with the actions of Amity University. The court did not grant the university the opportunity to pay Ayesha a compensation of one lakh rupees terming it as a mockery of justice. The judges noticed that no amount of money can ever compensate the harassment or loss of a precious year of study. This strong reprimand was an indication that the court was seeking material remedies and not a mere monetary solution.

The Supreme Court Broadens the Horizons.

Being aware that this problem may be common in other organizations, the Supreme Court made the case scope much broader. Individual petition was transformed into the larger public interest investigation by Justices Ahsanuddin Amanullah and N.V. Anjaria. They argued that having a great university harassing a student because of a mere legal process, the management of a private university required a comprehensive check up. This prompted the directive to conduct a full-scale country wide audit of all the private universities in India.

It has ordered the Union Government, all State Governments and Union Territories to provide detailed reports to the court. Such reports should elaborate on the legal character of establishment of each of the private universities. The court would like to understand what laws and regulations were specific that enabled these institutions to open their doors. This is to ensure that the private universities are not operating under the law that was initially intended to them.

More so, the court has also insisted that there should be complete disclosure of the benefits that the government granted these universities. This contains information concerning land allocations, tax cuts and any other financial relief by the state. The judges wish to know whether the universities are fulfilling the terms which come along with such benefits. In many cases, the institutional owners are given public land at low costs with an obligation of serving the interests of the people and this audit will ensure that they are fulfilling their obligation.

The order is very demanding in accountability and requires personal affidavits of the top management. These documents have to be signed by the Cabinet Secretary of India as well as the Chief Secretaries of each state. The court has clarified that they are not able to assign this to their junior officers. This makes sure that the senior bureaucrats directly become responsible in the accuracy of the information presented to the court.

Review of Governance and Finances.

One of the principal aspects of this audit will be the identity of those in charge of running and control of these private universities. The Supreme Court has requested a complete list of the societies, trusts or organizations which run these institutions. They desire to be informed about the names of the people that were in the governing bodies and how they were elected. This is so that these educational temples are not being operated as a sort of personal preserve or profit-making corporations masquerading as charities.

This is because the idea of no-profit, no-loss is a core guiding principle of the functioning of educational institutions in India. The court would like to ensure whether the private universities are in fact following this principle. The audit will enquire on whether the money that was allocated in education is being used more in personal use by the founders or their families. Any indication of money drainage or gaining of assets in the pretense of university costs will be subjected to very high scrutiny.

The University Grants Commission (UGC) which is the primary controller to higher education is no exception and has been in the spotlight as well. UGC Chairman has been instructed to sign a personal affidavit as to how he or she is involved in policing these universities. The court would like to understand what the UGC is doing to make sure that its rules are enforced. The regulator can no longer be at the periphery; he or she must demonstrate that he or she is keeping an eye on the sector.

The grievance redressal procedures to be taken by the students and staff will also be included in this audit. The court would also like to find out whether the school has good mechanisms allowing students like Ayesha to report about harassment or administration slowdown. This was one of the main reasons why this case escalated, as response mechanism was not established properly at Amity. The court wants all the private universities to have a working and responsive mechanism to address any complaint raised by the students.