The 80% IIM fee-cut, the issue that HRD Minister Murli Manohar Joshi may have thought was an open-and-shut case after the Supreme Court decison has now been re-opened—both in the apex court and in at least two premier IIM campuses.A bench headed by Chief Justice V N Khare today decided to take up on Friday a plea by the petitioners asking to amend the court’s order of February 27 and secure an ‘‘undertaking’’ from the Government on the issue of IIMs’ autonomy.That ‘‘undertaking,’’ the petitioners say is missing in the court order disposing of their PIL challenging the fee cut. The order merely records the Government’s contention that the fee cut ‘‘shall not be construed as interference in the autonomy of the institutions.’’When petitioners’ counsel Harish Salve raised this issue in the court today, Justice Khare replied: ‘‘Yes, I remember there was an undertaking by the government.’’But the Government’s counsel, Saurabh Kirpal, said he found no need to introduce the word ‘‘undertaking’’ in the February 27 order prompting Justice Khare to ask Salve to file an application to be listed on March 12.Salve, when contacted, said the application to be filed tomorrow will plead that ‘‘if the Government does not agree to give an undertaking on the IIMs’ autonomy, the court may recall its order and hear the PIL on merits. For, it was only on this condition that we agreed to the fee cut.’’Kirpal, on his part, said the Government’s response in the court on Friday ‘‘will depend entirely on what kind of undertaking the petitioners want to be given.’’For the IIMs, however, even an undertaking may not be enough to dispel their fears—what they want is a rollback of the fee-cut. In fact, the IIM faculty at Bangalore and Kolkata—after the SC order—have passed resolutions criticising the fee cut.Asked if the fee cut will be acceptable if the Government gives an undertaking not to interfere with the autonomy of the IIMs, IIM Bangalore director Prakash Apte told The Indian Express: ‘‘Assurances are often person-dependent and not durable enough an arrangement for institutions.’’Apte said the resolutions passed by his faculty and that of the Kolkata IIM ‘‘question the efficacy of fee cut as a means to achieve the end of making higher education more accessible to the poor.’’Despite the Supreme Court’s nod to the fee cut, the consensus in the faculty, Apte said, was that the Government’s order of February 5 should be kept in abeyance till there is wider debate on it. ‘‘The fee-cut issue has serious long-term implications for students, institutions, Government and society at large.’’
