Op-ed: Over-regulation is stifling India's universities; one regulator may not fix it
India's least-regulated institutes are its best. Should a new super-regulator mean more rules or more trust?
Published 5 October 2026. Written by Pratidin from the reports linked at the end; every fact checked by a separate review before publishing. How we work
An op-ed in The Hindu on 5 October 2026, titled "How regulation stifles HEIs", argues that India's higher education institutions (HEIs) are held back less by too little regulation than by too much. The writer says that inspections and accreditation have turned colleges towards producing documents rather than teaching: institutions learn to satisfy the inspector, and evidence files replace real engagement with students. The piece is written in the context of the Viksit Bharat Shiksha Adhishthan (VBSA) Bill, 2025, which proposes one overarching regulator for higher education, and the writer warns that a new structure will not help if the habits of control remain.
The writer points to the University Grants Commission's 2018 regulations on minimum qualifications and maintenance of standards as an example of rules that micro-manage. The regulations say a full-time teacher's workload "should not be less than 40 hours a week for 30 working weeks (180 teaching days)" and that teachers should be available for at least 5 hours daily in the university or college, with direct teaching of 16 hours a week for Assistant Professors and 14 hours for Associate Professors and Professors. The op-ed contrasts such rules with institutions set up under their own Acts of Parliament, such as the IITs, IIMs, IISc, NITs and IISERs, which sit largely outside the UGC's approval framework and, the writer argues, consistently do better on quality.
The VBSA Bill was introduced in the Lok Sabha on 15 December 2025 by the Ministry of Education and referred the next day to a Joint Parliamentary Committee chaired by Daggubati Purandeswari. It would dissolve the UGC, the All India Council for Technical Education (AICTE) and the National Council for Teacher Education (NCTE) and set up a Viksit Bharat Shiksha Adhishthan Commission with three councils for regulation, standards and accreditation. Funding is not among the Commission's functions; grants to centrally funded institutions would be disbursed through the Ministry. Supporters say a single regulator will end overlapping approvals. The op-ed's view is that unless the new body trusts institutions with graded autonomy and judges outcomes rather than paperwork, it may simply centralise the same compliance culture.
Prelims facts
- The Viksit Bharat Shiksha Adhishthan Bill, 2025 was introduced in the Lok Sabha on 15 December 2025 and referred to a Joint Parliamentary Committee on 16 December 2025.
- The Bill would replace the UGC, AICTE and NCTE with a single Commission having Regulatory, Standards and Accreditation Councils; funding stays with the Education Ministry.
- UGC's 2018 regulations set a teacher's workload at not less than 40 hours a week for 30 working weeks (180 teaching days), with at least 5 hours' daily availability on campus.
- The op-ed argues that compliance-heavy regulation rewards documentation over teaching and that autonomous institutions like the IITs and IIMs outperform tightly regulated ones.
Quick recall
- When was the Viksit Bharat Shiksha Adhishthan Bill introduced, and in which House?
- 15 December 2025, in the Lok Sabha.
- Who chairs the JPC examining the VBSA Bill?
- Daggubati Purandeswari.
- Which three regulators would the VBSA Bill dissolve?
- UGC, AICTE and NCTE.
- Name the three councils under the proposed VBSA Commission.
- Regulatory Council, Standards Council and Accreditation Council.
- Under UGC's 2018 regulations, a teacher's minimum workload?
- Not less than 40 hours a week for 30 working weeks (180 teaching days).
- Direct teaching hours under UGC's 2018 regulations?
- 16 hours a week for Assistant Professors; 14 for Associate Professors and Professors.
- Under which Act is the UGC a statutory body?
- The University Grants Commission Act, 1956.
- What penalty does the VBSA Bill propose for setting up an institution without approval?
- At least ₹2 crore, and possible closure.
Prelims practice question
With reference to the Viksit Bharat Shiksha Adhishthan Bill, 2025, consider the following statements:
1. It proposes to replace the University Grants Commission, the AICTE and the NCTE.
2. It gives the proposed Commission the power to disburse grants to universities.
3. It was referred to a Joint Parliamentary Committee after its introduction in the Lok Sabha.
Which of the statements given above are correct?
- 1 and 2 only
- 2 and 3 only
- 1 and 3 only
- 1, 2 and 3
Show answer
Answer: (c) 1 and 3 only. Statement 1 is correct. Statement 2 is wrong: funding is kept outside the Commission and would be disbursed through the Ministry of Education. Statement 3 is correct: the Bill was introduced on 15 December 2025 and referred to a JPC on 16 December 2025.
Use this in UPSC Mains: previous-year questions
Recurring theme: Governance of higher education: regulation, autonomy and quality
- How to use this
Use the VBSA Bill to show that regulatory reform is about separating functions and limiting micro-management, not only about independence.
- The VBSA Bill, 2025 would replace UGC, AICTE and NCTE with one Commission and keep funding with the Education Ministry, separating funder from regulator.
- UGC's 2018 regulations prescribe teacher workload down to a 40-hour week and 5 hours' daily presence, an example of input-based control.
- How to use this
Show how NEP 2020's plan to restructure higher education regulation is now being legislated, and where the Bill departs from it.
- NEP 2020 urged separating funding from regulation; the VBSA Bill keeps funding with the Education Ministry instead of the new Commission.
- The VBSA Bill, introduced on 15 December 2025, creates Regulatory, Standards and Accreditation Councils but leaves funding with the Ministry.
- The Bill is before a Joint Parliamentary Committee, referred on 16 December 2025.
The regulation debate bears on whether higher education is run for compliance or for competitiveness, but the question is broader.
Mains practice question
"Indian higher education suffers less from a lack of regulation than from too much of it." Critically examine this statement in the light of the proposal for a single higher education regulator. (250 words)
Model answer
The Viksit Bharat Shiksha Adhishthan (VBSA) Bill, 2025 proposes one regulator for higher education. A recent op-ed argues that the deeper problem is over-regulation, not fragmented regulation.
The case that regulation stifles
- Compliance culture: colleges optimise for inspectors and documents rather than learning outcomes.
- Micro-management: UGC's 2018 regulations prescribe a 40-hour week for 30 working weeks and at least 5 hours' daily presence for teachers.
- Evidence of contrast: IITs, IIMs, IISc and IISERs, governed by their own Acts and outside UGC approvals, lead on quality.
The case for regulation
- Many private and State institutions need minimum standards to protect students from poor quality.
- Accreditation gives students and employers information they cannot gather themselves.
- Overlapping approvals by UGC, AICTE and NCTE created delay that a single regulator could end.
What the VBSA Bill does
- Replaces UGC, AICTE and NCTE with a Commission and three councils: Regulatory, Standards and Accreditation.
- Separates funding, which stays with the Education Ministry, from regulation, as NEP 2020 urged.
- Proposes penalties up to ₹75 lakh for repeated violations and at least ₹2 crore for running an unapproved institution.
Way forward
- Light but tight regulation: few, outcome-based standards, strictly enforced.
- Graded autonomy linked to accreditation results.
- Public disclosure in place of physical inspections.
- JPC scrutiny to protect State universities' role under the Concurrent List.
A single regulator will help only if it changes how regulation works, not just who does it.
The basics
Why this matters
India runs one of the world's largest higher education systems, and the rules that govern it are about to change. Parliament is examining a Bill to replace three regulators with one. The debate it has opened is older than the Bill: does Indian higher education need more control to raise standards, or less control so that good institutions can grow?
Who regulates today
- 1University Grants Commission (UGC)Sets standards and gives grants to universities and colleges
- 2AICTEApproves and regulates technical education such as engineering and management
- 3NCTERegulates teacher education
- 4NAACAccredits institutions on quality
- 5Own Acts of ParliamentGovern institutions like the IITs and IIMs directly
The University Grants Commission is the oldest of these. Each regulator issues its own rules, so a single university can face several sets of approvals.
The complaint about compliance
Regulators check quality largely through documents and inspections. The op-ed argues this creates a loop in which institutions put more effort into proving quality than into creating it.
- 1Workload hours, attendance, infrastructure, forms.
- 2Files, photographs and reports for inspectors.
- 3Ratings follow documents more than learning.
- 4Gaps found lead to new requirements, and the loop repeats.
The writer contrasts this with Institutions of national importance such as the IITs and IIMs, which are governed by their own Acts and, the writer says, perform better.
The proposed fix
The Viksit Bharat Shiksha Adhishthan Bill, 2025 would replace UGC, AICTE and NCTE with one Commission. It follows the idea of a single regulator first set out in NEP 2020 and the HECI idea.
- Three main regulators: UGC, AICTE, NCTE
- UGC both regulates and funds
- Separate approvals for technical and teacher education
- One Commission with Regulatory, Standards and Accreditation Councils
- Funding stays with the Education Ministry
- Penalty up to ₹75 lakh for repeated violations; at least ₹2 crore for an unapproved institution
The real question
A single body can cut overlapping approvals. Whether it reduces the compliance burden depends on what it chooses to regulate. Graded autonomy, outcome-based standards and public disclosure are the tools usually suggested to move from control to trust.
Go deeper
In one line: A Hindu op-ed argues that compliance-heavy regulation, not a lack of it, holds back Indian universities, and that the proposed single regulator must change how it regulates, not only who regulates.
Why it matters for UPSC
Higher education governance is a GS2 social-sector theme, and the regulator debate links to statutory bodies, federalism (education is in the Concurrent List) and NEP 2020. The VBSA Bill is pending before a JPC, so it is likely to stay in the news.
The core idea
Today the University Grants Commission, AICTE and NCTE regulate different parts of the system. The op-ed says their detailed rules, such as fixed workload hours, push colleges to focus on paperwork. It contrasts them with Institutions of national importance like the IITs, which run under their own Acts. The Viksit Bharat Shiksha Adhishthan Bill, 2025 would merge the three regulators, an idea first set out in NEP 2020 and the HECI idea.
Numbers and dates to remember
- 1953: UGC set up; 1956: UGC Act.
- 2018: UGC regulations; 40 hours a week, 30 working weeks, 180 teaching days, 5 hours daily presence.
- 15 December 2025: VBSA Bill introduced; 16 December 2025: sent to JPC.
- 3 regulators to be replaced: UGC, AICTE, NCTE.
- ₹75 lakh and ₹2 crore: proposed penalties.
Where to go next
- University Grants Commission: the main regulator the Bill would replace.
- Viksit Bharat Shiksha Adhishthan Bill, 2025: what the single regulator would look like.
- NEP 2020 and the HECI idea: where the single-regulator idea comes from.
- Institutions of national importance: why IITs and IIMs sit outside the usual rules.
Go deeper: control versus trust
Arguments for lighter regulation. The op-ed's central claim is that inspection-led regulation rewards paperwork. Detailed input rules, like the University Grants Commission's workload hours, tell institutions how to work rather than what results to deliver. The best-known Indian institutions, the Institutions of national importance, are governed by their own statutes and boards and are largely outside these approval systems. The writer reads their success as evidence that autonomy, not control, drives quality.
Arguments for strong regulation. India's system includes many small private colleges and under-funded State universities. Without enforceable minimum standards, students can pay for degrees of little value. Accreditation supplies information that students cannot gather themselves. The IITs and IIMs also differ in selection, funding and history, so their success cannot be credited to autonomy alone.
Where the Bill fits. The Viksit Bharat Shiksha Adhishthan Bill, 2025 answers one complaint, overlapping regulators, by creating a single Commission. It also separates funding from regulation, as NEP 2020 and the HECI idea urged. It does not by itself reduce the number of rules, and its penalties are steeper than those under current law.
Federal angle. Education is in the Concurrent List (Entry 25, List III) while standards in higher education fall under Entry 66 of the Union List. States run most universities, so how much room the new Commission leaves to State regulation will be a key question before the JPC.
Middle path. Light but tight regulation: few outcome-based standards, mandatory public disclosure, graded autonomy tied to accreditation, and strict action only against clear failure.
University Grants Commission
The oldest higher education regulator and the main body the Bill would dissolve.
In one line: A statutory body set up under the UGC Act, 1956 to coordinate and maintain standards in university education and to give grants to universities and colleges.
History
The UGC was set up in 1953 and given statutory status by the University Grants Commission Act, 1956. Its legal base is Entry 66 of the Union List, which gives Parliament power over coordination and determination of standards in higher education and research.
What it does
- Frames regulations on minimum qualifications for teachers, degrees, and maintenance of standards.
- Recognises universities and provides grants.
- Its 2018 regulations set a teacher's workload at not less than 40 hours a week for 30 working weeks (180 teaching days), require at least 5 hours' daily availability, and fix direct teaching at 16 hours a week for Assistant Professors and 14 for Associate Professors and Professors.
Criticism
The UGC both funds and regulates, which critics say gives it too much leverage over institutions. Detailed input rules, like workload hours, are cited as examples of micro-management.
Where to go next
Viksit Bharat Shiksha Adhishthan Bill, 2025
The pending law that would create one regulator for higher education.
In one line: A Bill introduced in the Lok Sabha on 15 December 2025 to replace the UGC, AICTE and NCTE with a single Viksit Bharat Shiksha Adhishthan Commission.
Structure
- A Commission with a Chairperson and up to 12 members, including the presidents of three councils, the higher education secretary, five experts and two State academicians.
- Three councils, each of 14 members headed by a President: a Regulatory Council (compliance standards, autonomy, grievances), a Standards Council (learning outcomes and academic benchmarks) and an Accreditation Council (accreditation frameworks).
- Covers technical education, teacher education and architecture; medical, legal and other professional courses are excluded.
- Funding is not a function of the Commission; grants to centrally funded HEIs are to be disbursed through the Ministry of Education.
Penalties
Up to ₹75 lakh for repeated contraventions; at least ₹2 crore, and possible closure, for setting up an institution without approval.
Status
Referred to a Joint Parliamentary Committee chaired by Daggubati Purandeswari on 16 December 2025.
Where to go next
NEP 2020 and the HECI idea
The policy origin of a single higher education regulator.
In one line: The National Education Policy 2020 proposed a single Higher Education Commission of India (HECI) with four independent verticals, separating regulation, accreditation, funding and standard-setting.
The four verticals
- National Higher Education Regulatory Council (NHERC): a single regulator for higher education, except medical and legal education.
- National Accreditation Council (NAC): a meta-accrediting body.
- Higher Education Grants Council (HEGC): funding.
- General Education Council (GEC): learning outcomes and academic standards.
NEP 2020 also called for "light but tight" regulation and graded autonomy for institutions.
How the VBSA Bill compares
The Bill keeps the idea of one Commission with councils for regulation, standards and accreditation. Funding, the fourth vertical in NEP, is left with the Education Ministry instead of a grants council.
Why it is in the news
The op-ed's call for trust and graded autonomy echoes NEP's own language.
Where to go next
Institutions of national importance
Why the IITs and IIMs work under their own laws, the op-ed's main example.
In one line: Institutions declared by an Act of Parliament to be of national importance, governed by their own statutes rather than the general approval system.
Constitutional basis
Entry 64 of the Union List covers institutions for scientific or technical education financed wholly or partly by the Government of India and declared by Parliament by law to be institutions of national importance. Parliament has used such laws for the IITs (Institutes of Technology Act, 1961), the NITs and others; the IIMs are governed by the Indian Institutes of Management Act, 2017.
What it means in practice
These institutions award their own degrees and are run by their own boards and councils under their Acts. They do not need UGC or AICTE approval for their programmes in the way that ordinary colleges do, which gives them more freedom over courses, faculty and admissions.
Why it is in the news
The op-ed holds them up as proof that autonomy produces quality. Critics note that their selective admissions and steady public funding also explain their results.
Where to go next
Prelims-style quiz
Consider the following statements about the Viksit Bharat Shiksha Adhishthan Bill, 2025:
1. It was introduced by the Ministry of Education.
2. The proposed Commission will have three councils for regulation, standards and accreditation.
3. It covers medical and legal education along with technical education.
How many of the statements given above are correct?- Only one
- Only two
- All three
- None
Show answer
Answer: (b) Only two. Statements 1 and 2 are correct. Statement 3 is wrong: the Bill covers technical education, teacher education and architecture, while medical, legal and other professional courses are excluded.
Consider the following institutions/bodies:
1. University Grants Commission
2. All India Council for Technical Education
3. National Council for Teacher Education
4. National Medical Commission
How many of the above does the VBSA Bill, 2025 propose to replace?- Only one
- Only two
- Only three
- All four
Show answer
Answer: (c) Only three. The Bill dissolves the UGC, AICTE and NCTE. Medical education is excluded from its scope, so the National Medical Commission is not replaced.
Consider the following statements:
Statement-I: Under the VBSA Bill, 2025, the proposed Commission will not disburse grants to higher education institutions.
Statement-II: The National Education Policy 2020 recommended separating the functions of regulation, accreditation, funding and academic standard-setting.
Which one of the following is correct in respect of the above statements?- Both Statement-I and Statement-II are correct and Statement-II explains Statement-I
- Both Statement-I and Statement-II are correct and Statement-II does not explain Statement-I
- Statement-I is correct but Statement-II is incorrect
- Statement-I is incorrect but Statement-II is correct
Show answer
Answer: (a) Both Statement-I and Statement-II are correct and Statement-II explains Statement-I. Both are correct. Funding stays with the Education Ministry under the Bill, which follows NEP 2020's principle that the regulator should not also be the funder. Statement-II explains Statement-I.
Consider the following statements:
1. Under UGC's 2018 regulations, teachers must be available in the university or college for at least 5 hours daily.
2. The UGC was given statutory status by an Act of Parliament in 1956.
Which of the statements given above is/are correct?- 1 only
- 2 only
- Both 1 and 2
- Neither 1 nor 2
Show answer
Answer: (c) Both 1 and 2. Statement 1 is correct per the workload clause of the 2018 regulations. Statement 2 is correct: the UGC, set up in 1953, became a statutory body under the UGC Act, 1956.
Under which entry of the Seventh Schedule does Parliament make laws on coordination and determination of standards in institutions for higher education?
- Entry 25 of the Concurrent List
- Entry 66 of the Union List
- Entry 11 of the State List
- Entry 32 of the State List
Show answer
Answer: (b) Entry 66 of the Union List. Entry 66 of List I (Union List) covers coordination and determination of standards in higher education and research, the basis of the UGC Act and the VBSA Bill. Entry 25 of the Concurrent List covers education generally, subject to Entries 63 to 66 of List I.