Former human resource development minister Murli Manohar Joshi has refuted the charge that his ministry did not hold discussions with the directors and managements of Indian Institutes of Management on the issue of a new fee structure.
"I am shocked to hear the statement of Human Resource Development Minister Arjun Singh that we did not hold any consultations with the managements of the IIMs and that there was no file which would show that the consultations were held before lowering the fee charged by the IIMs," Joshi told newsmen at a press conference held at the BJP headquarters in New Delhi on Thursday.
"It is not correct to say that during my tenure the decision on fee reduction was taken without talks with IIM directors," he reiterated.
Giving details on the issue, he said: "At the June 19, 2000 meeting of the IIM directors, agenda item number 2.7 concerning 'Fee structure in IIMs and the other management schools in general' was put up for discussion," Joshi said.
Subsequent meetings were held on January 23, 2002; April 16, 2003; and October 30, 2003. "I called a meeting of all the directors in the last week of January this year. And it was only after these meetings that the February 5, 2004 order (which slashed IIM fees by 80 per cent) was issued. The IIM fees were fixed at Rs 30,000 instead of the previous Rs 150,000 per year."
"When the IIMs went to Supreme Court, the court asked them if they had come to appeal against the fee they said that this was not their intention and instead pleaded on the question of so-called interference with their autonomy," said Joshi.
"Autonomy does not mean autocracy. If IITs and All-India Institute of Medical Sciences can charge fees (which have been) fixed by the government, why not the IIMs?" he asked.
He quoted from the Supreme Court judgement that state governments could not only fix fees at government-aided institutions, but even those institutions which are self-financed.
Joshi said that reverting to the old fee structure of charging Rs 150,000 would amount to commercialisation of education.
"What about those students who cannot afford to pay this kind of fee and are forced to look for alternatives elsewhere. It is fine that you would provide scholarship to those students whose parents net earnings do not exceed Rs 200,000. What if the parental income is little over Rs 200,000?" he asked.
He rattled out statistics to show that some of the IIMs are so well off that they can afford to admit students free of charge.
"In 2002-2003 IIM-Ahmedabad has a surplus of Rs 18.35 crore (Rs 183.5 million) and the fee charged from the students worked out to 7.83 crore (Rs 78.3 million). Likewise IIM-Bangalore and IIM-Calcutta had a surplus of Rs 7.31 (Rs 73.1 million) and Rs 11.60 crore (Rs 116 million), respectively, for the year 2002-2003, while the fee charged by them worked out to be less then the surplus amount," he said.
Joshi said that the Bharatiya Janata Party will raise the matter both in Parliament and outside. " A public interest litigation is also being filed in the Supreme Court soon," he said when asked if he planned to move the apex court on the issue.
