27 June 2017

DBT से तीन साल में बचाए 57,029 करोड़

DBT से तीन साल में बचाए 57,029 करोड़
पिछली यूपीए सरकार की तरफ से शुरू की गई महात्मा गांधी राष्ट्रीय ग्रामीण रोजगार गारंटी योजना (मनरेगा) के जरिये नरेंद्र मोदी सरकार को सब्सिडी मद में सबसे ज्यादा बचत हो रही है। मोदी सरकार ने आधार के इस्तेमाल और डायरेक्ट बेनिफिट ट्रांसफर (डीबीटी) के इस्तेमाल के जरिये इस योजना के 1 करोड़ फर्जी लाभार्थियों को हटाकर इसे और बेहतर बनाया है।
मोदी सरकार ने दावा किया है कि उसने पिछले वित्त वर्ष में कई योजनाओं में डीबीटी के जरिये सब्सिडी मद में तकरीबन 20,000 करोड़ रुपये की बचत की। साथ ही, केंद्र सरकार ने 2014 से लेकर मार्च 2017 तक डीबीटी के जरिये कुल 57,029 करोड़ के बचत का आंकड़ा पेश किया है।

सरकारी आंकड़ों के मुताबिक, पिछले वित्त वर्ष में लीकेज को रोककर बचत के मामले में यूपीए की तरफ से शुरू की गई स्कीम मनरेगा टॉप पर रही। इससे पहले के वर्षों में सरकार को एलपीजी पहल स्कीम से सबसे ज्यादा बचत हुई। सरकार का दावा है कि उसने 2016-17 में मनरेगा के लिए डीबीटी भुगतान से 8,741 करो़ड़ रुपये की बचत की, जबकि पहल के जरिये बचत की राशि 8,185 करोड़ रुपये रही। एक सीनियर सरकारी अधिकारी ने बताया कि इसकी वजह मनरेगा खातों का रिकॉर्ड संख्या में आधार से लिंक कराया जाना है, जिससे एक करोड़ फर्जी जॉब कार्ड खत्म किए जा सके।

मनरेगा के तहत जॉब कार्ड्स की कुल संख्या 13 करोड़ थी, जो 2016-17 में घटकर अब 12 करोड़ हो गई है। सरकार ने अभियान चलाकर पिछले एक साल में इस स्कीम से जुड़ी गड़बड़ियों को खत्म किया है। एक सीनियर सरकारी अधिकारी ने बताया, 'यह दिलचस्प है कि यूपीए की सब्सिडी स्कीम सरकार के लिए सबसे ज्यादा बचत ला रही है। हमने 85 फीसदी मनरेगा खातों को आधार से लिंक किया है।'


सरकार के मुताबिक, 2014 से अब तक मनरेगा के तहत कुल बचत अब 11,741 करोड़ रुपये है। मोदी सरकार के सत्ता संभालने के बाद से सबसे ज्यादा बचत पहल स्कीम के तहत एलपीजी सब्सिडी के डायरेक्ट ट्रांसफर के तहत हुई है, जिसे मोदी सरकार ने 2014 में लॉन्च किया था। सरकार का दावा है कि इस स्कीम के तहत अब तक कुल बचत 26,769 करोड़ रुपये है। कंट्रोलर ऐंड ऑडिटर जनरल ऑफ इंडिया (सीएजी) ने इन आंकड़ों को बढ़ा-चढ़ाकर पेश किया गया बताया था, जिसके बाद सरकार के इन दावों को लेकर आलोचना भी हुई थी।

सरकार का दावा है कि वह एलपीजी सब्सिडी के 3.11 करोड़ फर्जी लाभार्थियों की पहचान करने में सफल रही है, जिनकी इस बाबत सब्सिडी या तो ब्लॉकर कर दी गई या ऐसे कस्टमर इनऐक्टिव हो गए। हालांकि, कंट्रोलर जनरल ऑफ इंडिया ने कहा कि सरकार ने यह माना कि ऐसे हर कस्टमर सालाना 12 सब्सिडी वाले सिलेंडर लेते, जबकि राष्ट्रीय स्तर पर ऐसे सिलेंडर्स की प्रति व्यक्ति सालाना खपत महज 6 है। हालांकि, सरकार अपने दावे पर कायम रही।

NPA resolution: well begun but half done

NPA resolution: well begun but half done

The initiation of the NPA resolution process has brought in a certain degree of rigour, but it still lacks the credibility to be called a bold initiative
NPA resolution: well begun but half done
The initiation of the NPA resolution process has brought in a certain degree of rigour, but it still lacks the credibility to be called a bold initiative
The Reserve Bank of India (RBI) has set the ball rolling for resolution of non-performing assets (NPAs) with the shortlisting of 12 big defaulters. These will now be processed further by the banks before being admitted by the National Company Law Tribunal (NCLT) for further processing of insolvency resolution as per the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016. This is a step in the right direction. The 12 borrowers comprise a significant part of the NPAs in the banking system, and therefore need to be handled with the importance that these deserve. The pace and extent of resolution of these assets would also act as an important signal for the remaining NPAs as well as for future delinquencies.

So what is the next step in the process? The question being asked by most observers and faced by creditors is this: Will the current steps being taken by the government and the RBI, as per the insolvency resolution process, help in any meaningful recovery of dues? In order to answer this question, it is important to understand the next steps in the process. The creditors will need to appoint an insolvency professional (IP), and form a committee of creditors. This will be followed by negotiations between the stakeholders, primarily the creditors and the debtors, to arrive at a common approach for resolution within 180 days (extendable to 270 days). If the parties are not able to arrive at a solution, the borrower will be referred for liquidation. The liquidation will practically mean the auction of the assets of the borrower to pay off the dues to the creditors. Let us assume that the process moves smoothly till the stage of auction of the assets. This is a fairly uncertain assumption in view of the untested process and potential legal hurdles. Nevertheless, at this stage, the creditors need to move ahead and give their best shot, as per the process of insolvency resolution. It is interesting to note here that while in theory the auction of NPAs is supposed to be the last resort for resolving the issue, in practice it is expected to be the most likely option.


When the assets are put up for auction, bidders will be expected to bid for these. But then the big question still remains—who will buy these assets and at what prices? A defaulting asset, by definition, means that the equity has zero value. So, why should any buyer pay any money for such assets? These assets in the power, roads or steel sectors cannot be said to command any brand value or any such off balance sheet value. The negotiations have to focus therefore on how much of a haircut on the credit will be accepted by the creditors so as to make the transaction viable for the buyer of the asset. Based on the amount of haircut in the credit amount, the return on investments to be made for the buyer will need to be at a respectable level.

One side of the equation is simple to understand. The amount of haircut taken by the creditors will directly translate to an accurate measurement of losses for the creditors. But it is the other side of the equation which is prone to a wide range of outcomes based on the underlying range of assumptions and potential scenarios. The computation of the expected future cash flows on an Excel sheet is one thing and putting one’s cash to work, based on the highly uncertain assumptions, quite another. For instance, the view of the buyer will be influenced by the buyer’s views on the markets, policies, regulations, political scenario, to name just a few high-level factors. It is interesting to note that if one assesses the correlation (or even causality) of most of these risk factors with the intent or commitment of the government to resolve the issue, it should turn out to be quite high. The buyer will seek appropriate compensation for the expected potential losses as well as unexpected losses to arrive at a desired rate of return at a given level of certainty.

In other words, even as the process of insolvency resolution for the so-called flagship cases has been initiated, observers must be wondering how the elephant in the room has been consciously missed till now. And that is the explicit commitment from the government in terms of policy certainty, capital support (direct or indirect), and political will. Unless this aspect is addressed directly and squarely, we are likely to face the apathy of potential buyers when we get to the final lap of the resolution process. It is also understood that in an ideal scenario, the government should not be a part of the resolution process involving private parties. However, the current scenario is far from allowing a market-oriented solution. There are too many issues of concern emanating from government policies, imperfect or absent markets, contractual issues and macroeconomic pay-offs, and the same affect a robust price discovery of NPAs.

As they say, you can lead a horse to water, but cannot force it to drink. The initiation of the NPA resolution process has brought in a certain degree of rigour, but it still lacks the credibility to be called a bold or successful initiative. The banks are taking the required actions to the extent of their respective abilities and governing atmosphere. The RBI is doing its best, and even stepping into executive functions like scrutinizing NPA accounts and issuing directives to banks. However, the government has not yet stepped up to the requirements. It should evaluate the bottlenecks within its domain and bring in the appropriate enablers to help resolve the NPAs at the earliest.

Setting up the defence industrial ecosystem

Setting up the defence industrial ecosystem

Much will depend on how the government’s ‘strategic partnership’ model plays out on the ground\

Setting up the defence industrial ecosystem
Much will depend on how the government’s ‘strategic partnership’ model plays out on the ground
Last week was an interesting one for Indian defence manufacturing. On Monday, Tata Advanced Systems Ltd and US plane-maker Lockheed Martin Corp. signed an agreement at the Paris Air Show to produce F-16 fighter jets in India. On Tuesday, in Delhi, Reliance Defence entered into a strategic partnership with Serbia’s Yugoimport for ammunition manufacturing in India. On Wednesday, back in Paris, Reliance Defence joined hands with France’s Thales to set up a joint venture that will develop Indian capabilities in radars and high-tech airborne electronics.

In Moscow, on Friday, defence minister Arun Jaitley and his Russian counterpart signed off on a road map for strengthening bilateral military ties. Meanwhile, at home in India, the army rejected, for the second year in a row, an indigenously-built assault rifle after it failed field tests—a pointed reminder of how the country’s sub-par defence industry continues to damage the military’s operational preparedness.

MORE FROM LIVEMINT »
Taxpayers have less than a week to link Aadhaar with PAN
Highlights of the first Modi-Trump meeting
All you need to know about GST
For the most part, India has sought to make up for that failing at home with imports from abroad. Between 2012 and 2016, India was the world’s largest importer of major arms, accounting for 13% of the global total and increasing its arms imports by 43% from the 2007-11 period, according to the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute (Sipri).

That being said, in recent years there has been a greater focus on developing indigenous capabilities through technology transfers and joint production projects with international partners. The Narendra Modi government has also put defence at the core of its flagship domestic manufacturing programme, Make in India. It has opened up the still largely state-run sector to private players and foreign firms in an effort to build a “defence industrial ecosystem” that will not only support the country’s military requirements but also emerge as an important economic lever—generating exports, creating jobs, and spurring innovation.

The target is to source about 70% of India’s military needs from domestic sources by 2020. This is an ambitious plan—that’s approximately how much India imports at the moment—but it is one that has been in the works for quite some time now. Notably, the defence manufacturing industry has been open to the private sector for well over a decade, and several foreign firms are involved in the joint production of weapons systems in India.

Yet the defence industrial ecosystem hasn’t quite taken off. The Indian military is still heavily reliant on foreign imports and state-owned defence firms are still the dominant force in the market. Private firms, though growing in number, have struggled to find their feet. It is too early to say if the incumbent administration’s efforts will bring better results, but much will depend on how its “strategic partnership” model, released late May, plays out on the ground.

Conceptualized by the Dhirendra Singh committee in 2015, this model has the defence ministry identifying a few Indian private companies as strategic partners (SPs) to tie up with a few foreign original equipment manufacturers to produce some big-ticket military platforms. In the process, the SPs are expected to help catalyse the country’s defence industrial ecosystem. This has already led to some concern about the ministry of defence (MoD), often criticized for not offering a level playing field to the private sector, picking favourites.


As Laxman Behera from the Institute for Defence Studies and Analyses (Idsa) notes, “Time and again, the MoD has deviated from its own promise of fair play in award of contracts and handed over large orders to DPSUs (defence public sector undertakings) and OFs (ordnance factories) on nomination”.

Moreover, the MoD also prohibits its strategic partners from working in more than one segment. This is supposed to ensure that the SPs keep their focus but, as Richard Heald at the UK India Business Council points out, this “ring-fencing of six strategic platforms” is problematic because “many of the six named domestic champions have already invested in defence verticals that may be different from those they are selected to focus on. Then, questions are being raised as to whether mechanisms will be put in place to achieve ‘value for money’ once the sector has been awarded to a strategic partner on an exclusive basis”.

Yet another issue is that of how small and medium-scale enterprises (SMEs) will respond to this model. SMEs are crucial to building a vibrant and robust ecosystem. In particular, they do a much better job of absorbing, developing and commercializing niche technology, which is key in the defence sector. But while the government acknowledges their role and importance, it is unclear if its policy supports that vision.

Outside of policy design, the biggest challenge to developing India’s defence industry ecosystem is undoubtedly human resource and skill development. The Dhirendra Singh committee report deals with this issue at length, noting that “India at present does not have a structured framework and a robust system to prepare its human resources to address all issues connected with building and sustaining defence systems”. The report recommends several measures to bridge this skills gap—from changes to academic curriculum to setting up institutions that specialize in defence and security to raising a new generation of system integration managers. The government must consider these carefully.

How do you think India can build its defence industrial ecosystem?

All you need to know about GST

All you need to know about GST

Here are some FAQs about the Goods and Services Tax (GST) slated for rollout on 1 July
What is GST?
Goods and Services Tax (GST) is a value-added tax at each stage of the supply of goods and services precisely on the amount of value addition achieved. It seeks to eliminate inefficiencies in the tax system that result in ‘tax on tax’, known as cascading of taxes. GST is a destination-based tax on consumption, as per which the state’s share of taxes on inter-state commerce goes to the one that is home to the final consumer, rather than to the exporting state. GST has two equal components of central and state GST.
What is input tax credit?
To make sure that tax is levied only on the amount of value addition at each stage of the supply chain, credit for the taxes paid at the previous stage is granted. For example, a garment manufacturer gets credit for the taxes paid on the materials purchased while computing the final indirect tax liability on his product that is collected from the consumer. Similarly, a service provider, say, a telecom company, gets credits for the taxes paid on the goods and services used in his business.
Who is liable to pay GST?
Businesses and traders with annual sales above Rs20 lakh are liable to pay GST. The threshold for paying GST is Rs10 lakh in the case of northeastern and special category states. GST is applicable on inter-state trade irrespective of this threshold.
What are the existing taxes subsumed into GST?
Taxes on production such as central excise duty and additional excise duty, import duties such as additional customs duty known as countervailing duty and special additional customs duty, service tax, central cesses and surcharges, state taxes like value-added tax (VAT), central sales tax on inter-state trade of goods, luxury tax, entertainment tax except those levied by local bodies, taxes on advertisements, taxes on betting and gambling and state cesses and surcharges on supply of goods and services are subsumed into GST. Basic customs duty, which includes the tariff barrier on imports, is not part of GST.
What are the benefits of GST?
GST brings transparency on the taxes levied on the supply of goods and services. At present, when an item is purchased, the common man sees only the state taxes on the product label, not the various embedded tax components. GST will improve the ease of doing business as entry barriers along state borders will be dismantled. The new indirect tax system is expected to improve tax compliance, boost revenue receipts of central and state governments and accelerate GDP growth rate by an estimated 1.5-2 percentage points. Elimination of cascading of taxes will result in reduced tax burden on many items.
What are the products not part of GST?
Crude oil, diesel, petrol, natural gas and jet fuel are temporarily kept out of GST. The GST Council, the federal indirect tax body of state finance ministers chaired by the Union finance minister, will decide when to bring these items into GST. Liquor is kept out of GST as a constitutional provision and hence it would require an amendment to Constitution if it is to be brought into GST net.
What is integrated GST or IGST?
IGST is the tax on inter-state supply of goods and services with central and state GST components.
How are imports treated?
Imports are treated as inter-state supplies and will attract IGST. Exports do not attract any tax. Taxes paid on raw materials and services used in export of goods and services are refunded to the business.
What is the anti-profiteering mechanism?
To prevent the possibility of prices going up and to make sure that the reduced tax burden on products and services are passed on to consumers, the government has introduced an anti-profiteering clause in the GST law. The anti-pro teering authority to be set up will act on complaints of profiteering and direct a profiteering supplier to cut price, return the benefit of reduced tax burden to the buyer with 18% interest, or recover such amount if the buyer cannot be identified or doesn’t make a claim. A profiteering business could lose its GST registration, too.
How are decisions taken at the GST Council?
No decision can be taken in the Council without the concurrence of both the Union and the state governments. Decisions will be taken by a 75% majority of the weighted votes of members present and voting. The Union government’s vote has a weightage of one-third of the votes cast, while all states together will have a weightage of two-thirds of the votes cast.

67 tiger deaths reported in first half of 2017

67 tiger deaths reported in first half of 2017
An average of 11 tigers died every month in the first half of 2017 in India, indicating that at this rate tiger deaths this year could cross the 2016 figure
An average of 11 tigers died every month in the first half of 2017 in India, a number that indicates the country could lose more of its national animals this year than it did in 2016, which saw 122 tiger deaths, the most in a decade.

Growth of illegal international trade in tiger parts is resulting in a growth in poaching in India, home to around 60% of the world’s tigers that live in the wild.

This year, a total of 67 tiger deaths have been recorded thus far. Of this, nine are presumed deaths on the basis of body parts seized (although it is possible the animals were killed earlier). In many of the remaining cases, the cause of death is yet to be established.

India has 50 tiger reserves that cover 2.12% of the country’s total geographical area
Of the 122 tiger deaths registered in 2016 , 22 were presumed deaths on the basis of body parts seized. In the other 100 cases, the cause of death ranged from natural death in old age to drowning, electrocution, fighting, road/rail accidents, and poisoning for revenge (by humans). Two tigers, both presumed man-eaters were shot by officials.

India is home to 2,226 tigers which is about 60% of the world’s wild tiger population of about 3,890. The number marks the success of India’s efforts to protect its national animal. A decade back, pressure on their habitat and poaching had seen their population reach a low of 1,411 (in 2006).

But the increase in their number also seems to be driving an increase in attacks on them.

Experts say the high demand for body parts of tigers is resulting in more deaths.

“There is tremendous pressure on wild tigers for poaching due to surge in demands of their body parts and skin in countries such as China, Vietnam, Taiwan, and Cambodia. This phenomenon is driving poaching of tigers in the South Asian countries,” said S.P. Yadav, assistant secretary general at the Global Tiger Forum, an inter-governmental organization dedicated to tiger conservation.

Other experts point to the continuous battle between development and conservation, and vanishing tiger corridors for the high number of tiger deaths.

A senior official of the Union environment ministry said the number looks high because of the increase in the number of tigers in India.

Still, “the government does not take anything lightly; all protocols are followed and every tiger death is investigated to see if it’s a case of poaching or revenge killing,” this person added, asking not to be identified.

To check dwindling population of tigers, the Indian government launched Project Tiger in 1973.

India now has 50 tiger reserves that cover 2.12% of the country’s total geographical area

Bribes, borders and middlemen: Why GST is a game changer

Bribes, borders and middlemen: Why GST is a game changer
GST will help reduce the immense power India’s myriad middlemen wield at state borders, free up internal trade, make it easier to do business and widen the tax base
Seized vehicles. Bribes. Days-long delays. Moving goods across Indian states isn’t exactly easy—and that’s a major barrier to economic growth.
Rolling a truck of vegetables into Gujarat, the state once governed by Prime Minister Narendra Modi, requires a bribe of Rs500 to Rs2,000 even with your papers in order, according to Rakesh Kaul, vice-president of Caravan Roadways Ltd, which has about 400 trucks plying India’s pot-holed roads.
But getting past the state tax collectors into Uttar Pradesh, India’s most populous state, will cost you more: Upwards of Rs20,000, Kaul says. The penalty for not paying off the right people is steep fines from factories whose raw materials are stuck at state borders—sometimes for as long as five days.
That’s why he and other companies are cheering the 1 July implementation of India’s biggest tax reform since independence in 1947. The move will replace more than a dozen levies with a new goods and services tax. That should help reduce the immense power India’s myriad middlemen wield at state borders, free up internal trade, make it easier to do business and widen the country’s tiny tax base.
“Even if your documents are correct, they will find some small error and hold your vehicle,” Kaul says in his New Delhi office, located in a dusty trucking depot where hundreds of drivers sit near their brightly painted trucks in the 42-degree Celsius (108-degrees Fahrenheit) heat. “Once GST is there, all that is gone.”
Common market
The new tax would be Modi’s most significant economic reform since coming to power in 2014. Yet with less than two weeks to go before its implementation, the government is still refining the details, announcing on Sunday it would relax initial filing requirements for July and August amid concerns businesses were not ready. Despite the last-minute tweaks, finance minister Arun Jaitley confirmed Wednesday the tax would roll out on 1 July.
While India already boasts one of the world’s fastest growing major economies, architects of the reform say it will stoke efficiency and growth by creating a common market of 1.3 billion consumers—a population greater than the US, Europe, Brazil, Mexico and Japan combined.
Take the border crossings: Lorry drivers in India lose 60% of transit time to road blocks, tolls and other stoppages, which means logistics costs are up to three-times higher than international benchmarks. While truck drivers may still need to stop to have their goods checked, cut that time in half, and logistics costs could fall by up to 40%, according to a 2014 World Bank report.
Also read: Are half-baked anti-profiteering rules a nightmare in the making?
There’s no shortage of hyperbole when it comes to describing the GST changes, which took more than a decade of protracted negotiations before Parliament pushed it through. The government’s chief economic adviser Arvind Subramanian described it as “transformational.”
“The GST is super important,” he said in an April interview. “It is also a daring, bold experiment in what I call the good governance of cooperative federalism.”
Four brackets
The GST rollout comes less than a year after the government’s surprise move in November to remove 86% of currency in circulation—a decision that contributed to a sharp slowing in growth during the January to March quarter. While the GST is seen as a leap forward in simplifying India’s system, getting the reform across the line has required compromises: India will have four tax brackets instead of the flat rate many other countries have.
Air conditioners, refrigerators and makeup will be taxed at 28%, for example, while toothpaste lands at 18%. Plane tickets attract a 5% GST rate, but business class tickets are 12%. Staples such as food grains and fresh vegetables are not taxed, while education and health services will continue to be exempted.
“India is obviously a huge and complex country in which governments’ ability successfully to implement major reforms is limited,” said Ian Hall, acting director of the Griffith Asia Institute.
‘Different countries’
The incoming GST will also force companies to consolidate their supply chain among fewer, larger facilities, says Vineet Agarwal, the managing director of Transport Corp. of India Ltd, which has about 10,000 trucks and around 11 million square feet of warehouses.
Currently, companies operate smaller factories and warehouses to take advantage of tax breaks offered by various states, as well as to avoid transporting goods over too many borders. “Literally, almost all states act like different countries,” Agarwal said.
One of the biggest goals of the GST is to widen the tax net in an economy where more than 90% of workers are employed informally. Companies will need to be in the tax system and prove they paid taxes to claim a credit against their costs. Pressure to comply will increase along the line and the black economy should shrink.
Inevitable disruption
Still, the tax may throw up losers. Manufacturing states may initially suffer as the extra revenue is generated in more populous consuming states. There are also sectors untouched by the new tax, including alcohol and real estate. Thousands of tax staff will also need to be trained and complex new IT systems adopted.
“There will inevitably be disruption as a result of the implementation of the GST,” said Samir Saran, vice-president of the New Delhi-based Observer Research Foundation.
To be sure, India isn’t alone in introducing a new tax that crosses jurisdictions and territories. More than 150 countries have a value added tax or GST including Canada, Australia and the European Union, according to Deloitte.
The optimistic case is that initial ruffles are soon smoothed over, according to Eswar Prasad, a professor at Cornell University in Ithaca, New York. “As in the case of the recent demonetisation gambit, any disruption in commerce and economic activity is likely to be short-lived, while the longer-term benefits could be significant,” he said.
Big companies will be prepared, Agarwal at Transport Corp. says, but he frets about the smaller, informal businesses. “There’s going to be chaos,” he says.
That informal workforce includes Babu Ram Rajput, a 28-year-old trucker in jeans and sandals who regularly drives goods across a vast swathe of north India. “I have not got any training,” he says, holding up a sheaf of tattered, dirty documents related to his current cargo. “I only know that GST is coming.”

Govt to rework plan on world-class universities

Govt to rework plan on world-class universities
Proposal on world-class universities submitted to cabinet to be deferred; inter-ministerial group to revamp the plan
The Union government has formed an inter-ministerial group to rework a cabinet proposal that aimed to establish 20 world-class universities in India.
Consequently, the proposal of the human resource development (HRD) ministry, submitted last month to the cabinet after months of deliberations, is being deferred, said two government officials on condition of anonymity.
MORE FROM LIVEMINT »
Erin Green, Infosys’s former head of immigration in US, files lawsuit against firm
Govt allows banks, post offices to deposit old bank notes with RBI
CDSL IPO subscribed 84 times
The inter-ministerial group comprises HRD minister Prakash Javadekar, textiles minister Smriti Irani, power minister Piyush Goyal and commerce minister Nirmala Sitharaman, the officials said.
“The four ministers will now decide the fate of the world-class university plan,” one of the two officials said.
The inter-ministerial group held its first meeting last week and another one is scheduled later this month, the second official added.
In February 2016, the centre announced a plan to establish 20 world-class universities in India—10 each in the private and public space. While a select group of existing public institutions will be upgraded to world-class status, both existing and upcoming private institutions can bid for the tag which has been changed from “world-class university” to “institute of eminence”.
Such universities, the government feels, will help Indian higher education institutions scale the global league table at a time when very few find a place among the top 200 best universities in the world. According to the latest QS World University Rankings 2018, only three Indian schools are in the top 200.
The world-class university plan aims to provide academic and financial autonomy and end the influence of the University Grants Commission (UGC). Such public institutions will get financial support of Rs10,000 crore from the HRD ministry.
The rethink on the proposal was prompted because of four reasons, the officials said. The first was the issue of reservations, especially for foreign students. If public institutions reserve 50% of the seats (27% for other backward classes, 15% for scheduled castes, 7% for scheduled tribes and 3% for physically handicapped candidates) as per the Constitution and then reserve 30% of the seats for foreign students, general category students candidates could get squeezed.
Second, the choice-based credit system for such universities allows students to complete a course in a shorter period than they can do now. If implemented, it could mean that a student will be able to graduate with a masters degree in a year, an option not available at present.
Third, some in the government contended that the decision to grant complete autonomy from UGC should be a considered one as a situation could arise that could warrant the intervention of a regulator.
Fourth, the proposed financial support to the 10 public institutions may prove to be insufficient to build an institution of the desired quality.
“The problem with too many interventions and groups is that it may not yield quick results, a case in point being labour reforms that are stuck for the last two years,” the second official said.
An HRD ministry spokesperson said he is not aware of the development.

Featured post

UKPCS2012 FINAL RESULT SAMVEG IAS DEHRADUN

    Heartfelt congratulations to all my dear student .this was outstanding performance .this was possible due to ...