The recent University Grants Commission (UGC) circular
urging higher education institutions (HEIs) to establish Grievance Redressal
Committees (SGRC) within two weeks highlights deep-rooted failures in India's
education system. While this move appears to signal progress, it raises
questions about the institutional inertia, delayed responses, and neglect of
student welfare.
This reminder comes in the wake of a tragic incident
involving a student from IP University who took his life after being barred
from exams due to insufficient attendance. The 2016 tragedy is a harsh reminder
of the consequences of institutional apathy, where rigid enforcement of
bureaucratic rules outweighs the well-being of students. These redressal
committees were mandated in April 2023, yet many institutions have failed to
comply, reflecting a larger pattern of neglect and indifference toward student
grievances.
For too long, students have suffered under outdated
attendance policies, arbitrary academic decisions, and indifferent
administrations. These issues, compounded by the absence of proper redressal
mechanisms, have damaged the mental health of many young individuals. It is
alarming that institutions have ignored a court mandate and UGC’s earlier
reminders. The UGC’s final ultimatum and threat of legal action are necessary
but late. Why does it always take tragedy and public outrage to hold
institutions accountable?
The core issue is not merely non-compliance but a wider
systemic problem: Indian educational institutions often treat students as
statistics to be managed, not individuals with complex needs. Grievance
redressal mechanisms should have been part of institutional governance from the
start, not a reluctant afterthought prompted by judicial intervention. This
failure reflects poorly on both the institutions and regulatory bodies like the
UGC, which has struggled to enforce its mandates.
The court’s critique of mandatory attendance is equally
significant. This outdated system underscores the gap between rigid educational
structures and the realities of student life. Attendance policies, often seen
as punitive, fail to foster meaningful engagement and create undue pressure. In
today’s world, especially post-pandemic, flexibility is essential for students
balancing personal and academic challenges. The focus on bureaucratic
compliance over student welfare is deeply flawed.
While the Delhi High Court’s call for stakeholder
consultations on attendance rules is a welcome step, it is disappointing that
it took a tragedy to spark these changes. Shouldn’t institutions have already
reconsidered these policies in a rapidly changing educational landscape? The
UGC’s circular, though overdue, must be the beginning of a shift toward
prioritizing student welfare. Without this shift, we risk continuing a system
that burdens students with the weight of institutional failures, often with
tragic consequences.