The Role of the Governor as Chancellor of State Universities

The role of the Governor as Chancellor of State universities has been a topic of debate in India. While it's often thought to protect universities from political influence, this role is actually a colonial legacy that has led to several challenges in modern India.

Colonial Legacy of the Chancellor Role (Background)

• The British established India’s first universities in 1857 (Calcutta, Bombay, and Madras), appointing Governors as their Chancellors to keep control over university affairs.
• Powers of the Chancellor: As Chancellor, the Governor had powers like appointing Vice-Chancellors, nominating members to university bodies, and overseeing university decisions. These powers were meant to limit university autonomy.
• Post-Independence: After independence, India inherited this system. Although it was designed to ensure academic freedom, in practice, it led to political interference, especially as Governors were appointed based on political loyalty.

Political Role of Governors

• From Ceremonial to Political: From 1947 to 1967, Governors were largely ceremonial, with the real power lying with Chief Ministers. However, after 1967, Governors started playing more active, often politically motivated, roles, especially when States had opposition governments.
• Political Appointments: Governors often came from political backgrounds, which led to conflicts between the Centre and State governments. This politicisation undermined the credibility of the office.
• Conflicting Roles: The Governor’s dual role — as both a constitutional figure (under Article 163) and a statutory authority (Chancellor of universities) — allowed them to act independently, often bypassing State governments, especially in Opposition-ruled States.

Problems Arising from the Governor as Chancellor

• Lack of Accountability: Governors have significant power in university governance but no direct accountability to the elected State governments.
• Delays and Administrative Issues: Governors’ power often results in delays, particularly in the appointment of Vice-Chancellors and other university positions, causing administrative paralysis.
• Political Interference: Instead of protecting universities from politics, Governors sometimes bring political influence into university affairs, undermining autonomy.

Comparisons with the President’s Role

• President as Visitor of Central Universities: The President of India acts as the Visitor for Central universities. Unlike Governors, the President works with the Ministry of Education, ensuring more transparency and oversight.
• Governor vs. President: The key difference is that the President’s role involves consultation and legislative oversight, while the Governor has unilateral powers in State universities, often bypassing State governments.