Nanda, who had criticised the Bill, fearing it could be used as a tool to "micro-manage" the IIMs, warned that there could be an adverse fallout on IIM standards if certain freedom was not granted. "The message <g data-gr-id="52">is hold</g> us accountable for our performance, but allow us enough autonomy so that we can realise our shared dreams,” he said.
"Wherever regulations comes, that means you have to take Central government's prior approval and that ranges from <g data-gr-id="60">selection</g> of chairman right down to things like how many new departments you should have," he said. "If the Bill turns out to be that a lot of decisions by the boards are subject to government approval, and the government has uniform norms, then that may or may not be best thing for certain IIMs," said IIM Bangalore Director Sushil Vachani.
Besides IIM-A, directors of Kolkata, Lucknow, Bangalore, Kozhikode and Indore have opposed the <g data-gr-id="58">Bill,</g> while chiefs of some of the new IIMs have supported it. The draft says the IIMs will be "bound" by government's directions in policy matters. "Without prejudice to the foregoing provisions of this Act, the Institute (IIMs) shall, for efficient administration of this Act, be bound by such directions on questions of policy, as the Central Government may give in writing to it from time to time," it says.
It also states that the IIMs will need the approval of the Ministry before notifying any changes in fee structure, salary and remuneration and admission criteria.
"To be globally excellent, you need to have a certain amount of autonomy you need to have certain resources, support of the government and leadership. The bill also provides for constitution of a coordination forum chaired by the HRD minister. Vachani said the perception was that the government was trying to "interfere" with IIMs when it is proposing a coordination forum single tenure for a director and that HRD ministry's decision will be final on policy directions.
A former IIM director, who was involved in drafting the bill, voiced surprise at the final draft as the earlier document did not contain any clause that gave "overwhelming authority" to the government in running the institutes. Nanda, however, felt consultation with the Ministry will lead to a positive outcome.
"...<g data-gr-id="50">atleast</g> my experience in the last 2 years is that it is consultative and we will continue to have conversations and hopefully arrive at a good decision," he said. The Ministry has refused to react about the opposition to the bill.
While the view in the older six IIMs is that an attempt is being made to infringe on their autonomy, those in the seven new premier institutes feel the apprehension is misplaced.
Coming out in support of the bill, Director of IIM Rohtak P <g data-gr-id="56">Rameshan</g> dismissed suggestions about the prestigious institutes losing their autonomy and contended that "some element of public discipline" is needed as "inefficiency" had crept in. "IIMs are public institutions where the government should have a fair degree of say in the overall interest of all," he said, adding "some element of public discipline is needed as there is a lot of inefficiency happening in IIMs".
Supporting the bill, the director of another new IIM trashed fears about <g data-gr-id="42">autonomy</g> of the IIMs getting compromised.
"The government is well aware that if anything goes wrong today, it will create a hype in media, which will not augur well for it. So it will be cautious in any step it takes keeping the overall interests of IIMs in mind," he said, wishing not to be named.