In a meeting of close to 40 deans and directors of PGDM institutions convened by The Education Promotion Society for India (EPSI), it was decided that these group of b-schools want to continue working under the regulatory framework of All India Council for Technical Education (AICTE) Act 1987.
This was decided in wake of the recent verdict of the Supreme Court (SC) which took MBA programs of university-affiliated colleges out of the purview of AICTE - this had raised questions about the status of PGDM institutions across the country.
The meeting was held at the India International Centre, New Delhi, to discuss this order as well as the case against AICTE pending in the SC.
Dr Pritam Singh, director general, International Management Institute (IMI), New Delhi who presided over the meeting, stated: "What is important to understand is that we are not opposed to a regulatory body itself but to the way AICTE functions. We are supportive of a regulatory body which promotes high quality management education. "
EPSI wants more autonomy in deciding curriculum, making admission on merit, deciding the overall quality and recruiting qualified faculty for b-schools. The body also expressed concern about the renewal of approval of programs by the AICTE every year. As per EPSI, b-schools have to have to submit voluminous reports every year for this purpose.
Recently on April 25, Supreme Court had passed a judgment stating AICTE approval is not required for private colleges running University-approved MBA programmes as role of the statutory body regarding MBA programmes is restricted to ‘advisory only'. MHRD is believed to be pursuing legal alternatives to amend the AICTE ACT to get around this impasse. However, the process is expected to involve ratification from the Parliament, and hence is expected to take time. Meanwhile, the 300 odd Institutes were unclear of the impact of this judgment on their functioning.
The dean and directors of leading PGDM institutions expressed their concern about certain inflexible regulatory practices of the AICTE which are hampering the smooth working of management institutions. They had particularly drawn attention to the practice of yearly renewal of the approval by the AICTE. Even very old and reputed institutions like XLRI, SP Jain, MDI, IMI, IMT and BIMTECH, have to submit voluminous reports for this purpose every year.
Deans and directors of PGDM institutions have also decided to approach the Supreme Court in July/ August, 2013 for giving a final verdict in the Case No. 92/2011 (EPSI, AIMS and Jaipuria Group Vs. AICTE). Already the apex court has issued three interim orders which disallow AICTE's Notification dated December 28, 2010.