GOVERNMENT OF INDIA
English language

Home | MyGov

Accessibility
Accessibility Tools
Color Adjustment
Text Size
Navigation Adjustment
Screen Reader iconScreen Reader
Menus
Sticky Menu

Give your inputs/suggestions on Draft IIM Bill 2015

Give your inputs/suggestions on Draft IIM Bill 2015
Start Date :
Jun 10, 2015
Last Date :
Jun 25, 2015
00:00 AM IST (GMT +5.30 Hrs)
Submission Closed

The proposed IIM Bill 2015 proposes to grant statutory status to thirteen existing Indian Institutes of Management (IIMs) at Ahmedabad, Kolkata, Bengaluru, Lucknow, Indore, ...

The proposed IIM Bill 2015 proposes to grant statutory status to thirteen existing Indian Institutes of Management (IIMs) at Ahmedabad, Kolkata, Bengaluru, Lucknow, Indore, Kozhikode, Shillong, Raipur, Ranchi, Rohtak, Kashipur, Tiruchirapalli and Udaipur, and declare them as Institutions of National Importance, to enable them to grant degrees to their students in the academic courses conducted by these institutes. Till now, these Institutions could award only certificate, Post Graduate Diploma and Fellow Programme in Management Certificate, which lacked universal acceptability in the field of academia and research. The Post-graduate Diploma in Management Programme was relatively unaffected by absence of a formal degree, both in terms of recruitment of students as well as suitable placements in job market but the Fellow Programme in Management did not get the same status as that of a Ph.D. in the job market, especially in faculty appointments. As a result, the Fellow Programme in Management (equivalent to Ph.D), without the formal degree stamp, has not, been able to attract talented students, required to develop a strong research base in the country in the field of management education and also address the faculty shortages affecting the management institutions in the country. The proposed Bill will address this gap. Fulltext: Draft IIM Bill 2015 Give your inputs/suggestions on Draft IIM Bill 2015 The last date to share your views is 24th June, 2015
Reset
Showing 258 Submission(s)
Aashish Argade
Aashish Argade 10 years 12 months ago
Point 30 – The objectives for the Co-ordination Forum are mentioned, without specifying its need. The presence of the Minister and MoS for HRD in the Co-ordination Forum brings in direct involvement of the Government into the functioning of the Institutes, which should be the last and least objective of the Ministry. This entire clause has to be scrapped if the Ministry believes in giving autonomy to the Institutes.
Dislike (0)
Reply
Report Spam
Comments (1)
Aashish Argade
Aashish Argade 10 years 12 months ago
Point 36 again makes it necessary for the Board to seek the approval of Central Government in several matters when changes in regulations might be required. This again impinges on the autonomy of the Institutes.
Dislike (0)
Reply
Report Spam
Comments (1)
Aashish Argade
Aashish Argade 10 years 12 months ago
15 (1) - For management Institutes, inclusion of representatives of the Industry and alumni in the Academic Council would add value as the curriculum can attract latest developments from the industry. Point 17 has some clauses which put the Central Government in total say of the appointment of the Director. The Visitor is given supreme powers and can simply express his/her dissatisfaction of the person selected for the post of Director. This has to be avoided.
Dislike (0)
Reply
Report Spam
Aashish Argade
Aashish Argade 10 years 12 months ago
Point 12 (2) (i) : The Institutes should be permitted to have variable pay and performance-related incentives for academic and other staff, as they deem fit, to foster a culture of learning, research and publishing. Point 13 (4) – The clause should apply to representatives of the State and Central government representatives as well. The members of Board should all be treated at par.
Dislike (0)
Reply
Report Spam
Comments (1)
Aashish Argade
Aashish Argade 10 years 12 months ago
In point 11 (b), the representative of the Central Government from the function of finance makes sense to the extent of understanding the financial status of the Institute. Why is the other representative required? Point 10 (2) seems to have overriding powers over point 12 (1). This ambiguity can lead to severe administrative problems that can also affect the daily operations of the Institute.
Dislike (0)
Reply
Report Spam
Comments (1)
Aashish Argade
Aashish Argade 10 years 12 months ago
Point 10 (2) gives sweeping powers to the Visitor to assess the work and progress of the Institute. This clause gives direct power to the Visitor to the extent of almost interfering in the operational issues of the Institutes. When the Institutes are asked to become self-sufficient and given leeway to design and promote the courses, the overriding powers of the Visitor can become detrimental to the performance of the Institute.
Dislike (0)
Reply
Report Spam
Comments (1)
Aashish Argade
Aashish Argade 10 years 12 months ago
Regarding point 7 (k), it will be good if the Central Government takes into account the opinion of the faculty, alumni and the Boards of the Institutes while appointing the Director. This would reinforce the government’s commitment to democracy and the stakeholders would also feel involved. Point 9 (2) talks of self-sufficiency and sustainability in financial matters. This is possible if the Institutes have full autonomy to raise their resources through fees and consultancy charges.
Dislike (0)
Reply
Report Spam
Comments (1)
Aashish Argade
Aashish Argade 10 years 12 months ago
I hope point 7 (i) only refers to the Institutes “intimating” the Central Government in advance, and do not require prior approval in specifying their fees and other charges. And if there is no requirement of approval, intimating the same to the Central Government may not be required as well.
Dislike (0)
Reply
Report Spam
Comments (1)
Aashish Argade
Aashish Argade 10 years 12 months ago
Point 7 (b) directly hits the autonomy of the Institutes in setting their own standards of admission by ceding all power in this regard to the Central Government. The Institutes, to grow as one of national importance, besides creating a name for themselves and the country in the world, need to be allowed to have their own criteria of admitting students to foster meritocracy and raise the standards of education.
Dislike (0)
Reply
Report Spam
Comments (1)
Manoranjan Xess
Manoranjan Xess 10 years 12 months ago
Why ain't the Govt representatives on the Board not penalised for absence from Board meetings in Section 13(4)? The Visitor seem to have extraordinary powers. Govt approvals for top administrative posts shouldn't be made mandatory as it could delayed like the appointments of CIC, CVC, etc. If the Minister incharge of Technical Education has no control over Management Education, then it doesn't make sense for him/her to head the Co-ordination Forum. Views expressed are based on my understanding.
Dislike (0)
Reply
Report Spam
Sticky Menu