To hike or not to hike

PROPOSED HIKE JUSTIFIED?
The interference of the state government has, however, angered the fee revision committee appointed by Mumbai University, which feels that by taking a “populist” stand, the state is only helping in “degradation” of the quality of teaching and learning in colleges.

In 2012, the university had formed a committee under the chairmanship of its former pro-vice chancellor Ashok Pradhan to review the fee structure of affiliated colleges. The committee’s report was tabled at the management council meeting in June 2013 for discussion. The committee had recommended that critical aspects like the basic infrastructure and teaching facilities at colleges, human resources, financial transactions and the performance of institutions would be considered before they are allowed to hike their fees.

Sunil Mantri, principal of N M College, Vile Parle, said, “Expenses on salaries of teaching and non-teaching staff and other essential aspects have increased since June 2008. To ensure that colleges comply with university and government norms, the fee structure must be revised keeping in view today’s cost and inflation. When the expenses have increased since 2008, how can we run the college on an old fee structure?”

Dinesh Punjwani, principal of R D National College in Bandra, said that as per the 6th Pay Commission, the starting salary of a teacher is currently Rs 40,000 to Rs 45,000. “Besides, when we appoint a teacher on a clock-hour basis, we pay them Rs 500 to Rs 1,000 per lecture, depending on the professional experience of the teacher. There are other expenditure on non-teaching staff, besides regular expenditure, which include electricity bills, water charges, stationary, which form a major component of our expenses. A college, on an average, gets an electricity bill of Rs 3-4 lakh per month,” he said.

Punjwani further said that colleges provide other facilities such as audio-visual facility in every classroom, and library and laboratory have to be maintained on a regular basis. “The government stopped providing colleges non-salary grants since 1997. How can a college survive merely on salary grants? This implies that we must either stop paying the non-teaching staff or stop providing these facilities to students. Why are these political parties not opposing the coaching classes where these same students are paying exorbitant fees?” he said.

A head of a university department, on condition of anonymity, concurred that non-salary grants for aided courses have stopped and that it was difficult to maintain infrastructure. “Since 2008, the expenses have been higher than the fees that colleges are collecting. This will soon have a bearing on the quality of education and facilities that these colleges offer. These are the grounds on which we have sought permission to hike fees. Let those who are opposed to it also give a valid reason,” said the academician.

Many colleges have even proposed that the state government must allow them to revise the tuition fees every year. “A body on the lines of the Shikshan Shulka Samiti (SSS) must be set up to annually inspect colleges and based on that, colleges should be allowed to revise their tuition fees every year. This will encourage colleges to provide quality education and world-class facilities to the students,” said the principal of a suburban college.

THE COMMITTEES
Soon after the Pradhan committee’s recommendations, Mumbai University formed two new fee regulatory committees on the lines of the Shikshan Shulk Samiti, which comprised principals, teachers, office-bearers of the electoral constituency, representative of a college management, a chartered accountant and a representative from the university. While one committee was headed by Dr Naresh Chandra, pro-vice chancellor of the university, the other was chaired by Dr Rajpal Hande, director of Board of College and University Development (BCUD), Mumbai University. To be able to hike fees, every college was required to submit a proposal to the two committees.

“Why must there be a political interference in academic issues? The proposal to hike fees was taken only after due consideration of various factors. Tomorrow, if institutions lack in something or if the quality of education goes down, these politicians will get another agenda to talk about and will end up blaming academicians,” said a senior university official, who was also member of the fee revision committee.

The fee revision committee, headed by Chandra, had recommended a hike in tuition fees and other components for unaided courses such as BMM and BMS, as well as traditional courses, which were started after 2000. Further, the committee had proposed a 25 per cent hike in gymkhana fees, library fees, laboratory fees, extra curricular fees, utility fees and development fees. They had mooted that besides these heads, there will be a 25 per cent hike on tuition fees for students in unaided colleges. For students from aided colleges, the committee did not propose any hike in the tuition fees.

According to the proposal, those colleges which do not pay their teachers salaries based on the Sixth Pay Commission or do not have a National Assessment and Accreditation Council (NAAC) may not be allowed to hike their fees.

“Some colleges are really facing problems and they deserve to be allowed to hike their fees. We don’t see any problem if the colleges which are following all the norms. have good infrastructure and pay their teachers as per 6th Pay Commission are allowed to hike fees after a gap of five years. We are, however, not imposing the hike. The idea was to allow fee hike only in cases where there was a genuine need to hike fees. There is a misunderstanding that the committee’s recommendations will give arbitrary powers to the colleges to increase the fees. The rules will be stringent and will not be compromised. Now that the proposal has been opposed, we will hear out all the stakeholders. Only after taking the recommendations, suggestions and objections of the stakeholders will we table the proposal before management council,” said Chandra.

CURRENT FEE STRUCTURE
In 2008, the university revised the annual fees for undergraduate courses and increased it by Rs 600 to Rs 800. For self-financing courses, the fees were hiked to Rs 5,000 a year from Rs 3,000. In addition, the university had also allowed colleges to introduce utility and development charges in their annual fee structure, with a view to help colleges tide over the fund crunch.
Further, according to figures given by the university, the fees for aided courses (BA, BCom) currently is Rs 4,105 in the first year. Similarly, in aided BSc courses, the fee is Rs 4,905 in the first year.

For unaided programmes in BA and BCom, the fees is Rs 6,305, and for unaided BSc programmes, students have to pay Rs 7,105 in the first year.

On the other hand, for unaided professional courses, which includes Bachelor of Management Studies (BMS), Bachelor of Mass Media (BMM), BCom in Accounts & Finance (BAF), BCom in Financial Markets (BFM), the fee is Rs 17,225 in the first year.
The components, where a hike has been proposed in the fee structure, include tuition fee, utility fees, development fee, and library among others.

Several sections – teachers’ union, and students’ unions and Cabinet ministers – however, feel that the proposal is ‘unfair’ to students.
“Upset students have already started agitating against the proposed fee hike. Considering the 25 per cent hike, the burden on each student would be minimum Rs 1,200 for each term, and would increase even further depending on the type of course they are pursuing,” said Khan.

Dr Madhu Paranjape, member of the Bombay University and College Teachers’ Union (BUCTU), said that the teachers’ union opposed the hike as it would only benefit the management of the colleges and help them make more money. “The colleges hire teachers temporarily and do not pay them as per the recommended standards. Hence, allowing colleges to raise the fees will only lead to full-fledged profiteering,” she said.

Students’ unions like Prahar Vidyarthi Sanghatana, Yuva Sena, Maharashtra Navnirman Sena (MNVS) and Akhil Bhartiya Vidhyarthi Sena also protested outside Mumbai University’s Fort campus against the fee hike proposal. They argued that the fee hike would make higher education “inaccessible” to students from the rural areas.

“The university cannot demand a hike as they have not conducted an audit for over six years now. On what basis are they recommending a hike? Besides, if they allow one college to hike their fees, they cannot stop other colleges on any ground. According to section 52 (2) of the Maharashtra Universities Act, 1994, all colleges should have a uniform hike. Further, the university has no control over its affiliated colleges which charge more fees than the fee structure prescribed by the university. Taking all these aspects into consideration, we opposed the proposed 25 per cent fee hike “ said advocate Manoj Tekade, president of the Prahar Vidyarthi Sena, Maharashtra.

“Only because we protested last week, university officials agreed not to discuss the fee hike recommendation with the stakeholders.
Otherwise, it would have been tabled in the management council meeting and the university would have gone ahead with implementing the hike,” said Sudhakar Tamboli, Mumbai University senate member from MNVS.

dipti.singh@expressindia.com