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For too long, students have suffered under outdated attendance policies, arbitrary academic decisions, and indifferent administrations.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 This outdated system underscores the gap between rigid educational structures and the realities of student life.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.