University system not producing well-educated graduates: Shashi Tharoor

November 5, 2012
SHASHI_THAROORNew Delhi, November 5: The university system was not producing "well-educated" graduates to meet needs of Indian companies, giving an opportunity to firms to enter the sector in the "guise" of training, Minister of State for Higher Education Shashi Tharoor on Monday said. He also said that the national education policy in the past has been out of step with the times.

"The major problem remains that our national education policy in the past has remained out of step with the time. Whereas countries in the Middle-East and China are going out of their way to woo foreign universities to set up campuses in their countries, India turned away many academic suiters who have come calling in recent years," he said.

Speaking at a two-day Higher Education Summit, Tharoor said, "Companies are entering the higher education space in the guise of training. Our University system simply is not producing well educated graduates to meet the needs of Indian companies today."

The HRD Minister said there will be no need for many Indian students to go abroad to study if good higher education institutes were set up in the country. "We will also work towards putting our reform agenda back on track," he said. Tharoor said there is a proposal to establish 50 centres for research in frontier areas of science, design innovation centres, innovation centres in different universities and also research parts of the IITs and other technical institutions. "If finally established, it would transform the research environment in our country," he said.

Tharoor favoured expediting setting up of National Mission for teachers and recommendations of the Narayana Murthy Committee and the Kakodkar Committee besides increasing the spending of 2 per cent on research. The minister said with the ranks of educated unemployed in the country swelling in the absence of adequate employment opportunities, there is possibility of their falling prey to the activities of terrorists and Maoists.

"We must give them a better chance of employment through more and improved educational possibilities. My message is it is time to let a thousand educational flowers bloom," he said. He said even though India with 621 universities and 33,500 colleges has one of the largest network of higher education institutes across the world and second in terms of student enrolment, our gross enrolment ratio of 18.8 per cent in 2011 is still less than the world average of 26 per cent.

He said there was need to develop higher levels of education and skill development and an environment must be created in which not only the economy grows rapidly but also enhances good quality employment. Tharoor said as India aims to grow at 8.2 to 8.5 per cent GDP, the country needs to invest in education and help improve the quality of education.

Referring to a few world-class institutes like IIT's and IIMs and some colleges, the Minister said, "These are still islands in a sea of mediocrity". Citing a UGC survey of 1,471 colleges and 111 universities, he said 73 per cent of the colleges and 68 per cent of the universities are found to be of medium or low quality.

He also said that a FICCI survey has revealed in 2009 that 64 per cent employers are "somewhat satisfied" with the quality of new graduates coming out of engineering institutes. The minister lamented that spending on education is only 1.22 per cent of GDP, against USA's 3.1 per cent or South Korea's 2.4 per cent. He also said that the student-teacher ratio in India was 26:1 against the global average of 15:1. He said the rapid expansion of higher education sector has also led to shortage of faculty.


Comments

Add new comment

  • Coastaldigest.com reserves the right to delete or block any comments.
  • Coastaldigset.com is not responsible for its readers’ comments.
  • Comments that are abusive, incendiary or irrelevant are strictly prohibited.
  • Please use a genuine email ID and provide your name to avoid reject.
Agencies
March 1,2020

Kolkata, Mar 1: The Calcutta High Court has ruled that it is not mandatory for foreigners to produce a valid passport and its particulars for processing of application for grant of Indian citizenship if he is able to satisfy the appropriate authorities the reasons for non-availability of the document.

Justice Sabysachi Bhattacharya passed the order while disposing off a petition by granting the petitioner liberty to file an application before the authority "as contemplated in Rule 11 of the Citizenship Rules 2009, upon furnishing explanation as to the non-availability of the passport".

Bismillah Khan had filed the petition saying he was being denied the citizenship of India because of his inability to file an application under Section 5 (1) (c) of the Citizenship Act, 1955, apparently due to the mandatory requirement of furnishing a copy of the passport for such application.

The petitioner's counsel submitted that Khan was a Pakhtoon citizen and due to political turmoil in the said state, which subsequently merged partially into Afghanistan and partially into Pakistan, he, as a five-year old, had to migrate to India with his father in 1973.

Under such circumstances, the petitioner could not have any opportunity of having a valid passport, since they were refugees under distress, the counsel said.

The petitioner had previously approached a coordinate Bench of the court, wherein a single judge, passed an order on July 25, 2018, directing him to comply with the formalities required, as communicated by the secretary to the Government of India to the Secretary to the Government of West Bengal (Home), vide a letter dated December 7, 2017.

The court had then also given liberty to the petitioner to apply afresh before the appropriate authority under Section 5(1)(c) of the 1955 Act, having complied with all the formalities.

The petitioner then moved Bhattacharya's court submitting that a complete application as directed by the Coordinate Bench cannot be possibly filed by his client due to the mandatory requirement of uploading a copy of his passport, which the petitioner does not have due to reasons beyond his control.

The counsel said Khan is married to an Indian citizen, has a daughter and living in India for close to half a century.

The counsel for the union of India submitted that in view of no application having been filed by the petitioner, there is no scope of granting such proposed application at the present juncture for the Union.

The counsel argued that it is mandatory to file an application in Form III for the application of the petitioner under Section 5(1)(c) of the Act to be considered at all.

In view of the petitioner not complying with the mandatory requirement of submitting a copy of his passport, the state government cannot, under the law, forward such application to the union government.

After hearing all sides, Justice Bhattacharya said although the rule "contemplates that an application shall not be entertained unless the application is made in Form III, such provision ipso facto does not make the availability of a passport a mandatory requirement".

"..the Form given with the Rules or the Rules themselves cannot override the provision of the statute itself, under which the said Rules are framed, which does not stipulate such a mandate on the applicants for citizenship under Section 5 (1)(c) of the 1955 Act mandatorily to carry a passport".

The court said although such provision is included in the Form, which has to be complied with by the applicant, "it is nowhere indicated in such Form that all the relevant particulars, including the particulars regarding passport of the petitioner have to be furnished mandatorily, along with a copy of a valid foreign passport, even in the event the petitioner, for valid reasons, is not in a position to produce such passport".

Justice Bhattacharya ruled that under such circumstances, it cannot be held that the provision of producing a passport and its particulars is mandatory in nature and there has to be a relaxation in such requirement "in case the petitioner is able to satisfy the appropriate authorities the reasons for non- availability of such passport".

"Unless such a leeway is given to the applicants, genuine persons who otherwise have all the formal documents indicating that they have been residing in India for a long time and have married a resident of India would also be unable to apply for Indian Citizenship despite having lived their entire lives and contributed to the economy and diverse culture of this country."

He said such a scenario would be contradictory to the spirit of Article 14 of the Constitution of India.

"In such view of the matter, the requirement of having a passport has to be read as optional in Form III of the Citizenship Rules, 2009 and the authorities are deemed to have the power to relax such 6 requirement in the event the applicant satisfied the authorities for genuine reasons why the applicant is not in a position to produce such passport," the February 24 order said.

The court ruled that despite the provision of making applications online, a provision has to be made for persons who do not have all the particulars of their passport, which is read as optional, to file applications manually, which are to be treated as valid applications under Rule 5 of the Citizenship Rules, 2009.

The court also ordered that alternatively the necessary software be amended so that the online applications can be presented with or without passports, in the latter case furnishing detailed reasons as to non-furnishing of passports.

"Sanctioning of such forms, however, will be conditional upon the satisfaction of the relevant authorities about the reasons for the applicant not being able to produce her/his passport," the order said.

Comments

Add new comment

  • Coastaldigest.com reserves the right to delete or block any comments.
  • Coastaldigset.com is not responsible for its readers’ comments.
  • Comments that are abusive, incendiary or irrelevant are strictly prohibited.
  • Please use a genuine email ID and provide your name to avoid reject.
News Network
March 2,2020

Feb 2: The Supreme court on Monday decided to hear on March 4 a plea seeking registration of FIRs against politicians for hate speeches which allegedly led to violence in the national capital.

A bench headed by Chief Justice S A Bobde agreed to hear the plea filed by riots victims.

The petition was mentioned for urgent listing by senior advocate Colin Gonsalves, appearing for the riots victims.

Gonsalves said that the Delhi High Court has deferred for four weeks the matters related to riots in the national capital despite the fact that people are still dying due to the recent violence.

Comments

Add new comment

  • Coastaldigest.com reserves the right to delete or block any comments.
  • Coastaldigset.com is not responsible for its readers’ comments.
  • Comments that are abusive, incendiary or irrelevant are strictly prohibited.
  • Please use a genuine email ID and provide your name to avoid reject.
News Network
March 30,2020

New Delhi, Mar 30: The government on Monday said there was no plan to extend the 21-day lockdown which came intro force on Tuesday midnight.

The Press Information Bureau (PIB) of the Ministry of Information and Broadcasting tweeted, saying Cabinet Secretary Rajiv Gauba has denied media reports claiming that the government will extend the lockdown.

"There are rumours & media reports, claiming that the Government will extend the #Lockdown21 when it expires. The Cabinet Secretary has denied these reports, and stated that they are baseless," it said.

The 21-day lockdown is aimed at checking the spread of the coronavirus.

Following the lockdown, there has been a massive exodus of migrant workers from big cities to their villages after being rendered jobless.

Comments

Add new comment

  • Coastaldigest.com reserves the right to delete or block any comments.
  • Coastaldigset.com is not responsible for its readers’ comments.
  • Comments that are abusive, incendiary or irrelevant are strictly prohibited.
  • Please use a genuine email ID and provide your name to avoid reject.