Supreme Court Warns Chief Secretaries of 'Heavy Personal Cost' for Formality Affidavits in Higher Ed Compliance

The Supreme Court of India has issued a stern warning to chief secretaries of all states and Union territories, cautioning them against filing mere 'formality' affidavits in a crucial higher education compliance case. This development underscores the court's determination to enforce accountability in the regulation of higher educational institutions, particularly private universities and colleges across the country.

In a recent hearing, the bench comprising Justices Ahsanuddin Amanullah and N V Anjaria expressed dissatisfaction with the responses submitted by state governments. The court explicitly stated that if the affidavits are found to be superficial or inadequate, it would impose 'heavy personal cost' on the chief secretaries who personally affirmed them. This rare personal accountability measure highlights the gravity of regulatory lapses in India's higher education sector.

Genesis of the Case: From a Student's Grievance to National Probe

The case originated from a writ petition filed by Ayesha Jain against Amity University, Noida. Jain alleged harassment by the institution after she legally changed her name and sought updates in university records. Despite providing gazette notification and other documents, the university refused, prompting her to approach the Supreme Court.

What began as an individual grievance rapidly expanded into a nationwide inquiry. The court recognized patterns of non-compliance and regulatory shortcomings in private higher education institutions. It appointed two monitors—Dr R M Sharma, a seasoned expert, and former IPS officer Ashok Prasad—to oversee compliance issues. Dr Sharma prepared a consolidated table detailing state-wise responses to key regulatory queries, revealing significant gaps.

SC's Directives on Affidavits and the Warning

Earlier orders required chief secretaries, the Union Cabinet Secretary, and the UGC Chairman to file personally sworn affidavits addressing critical questions: How were private universities established? What statutes governed their creation? What benefits were extended? How is ongoing monitoring conducted by UGC and states?

The court granted permission in some cases for senior departmental secretaries to affirm affidavits, but emphasized personal responsibility. During the latest hearing, the bench reviewed submissions and found many lacking depth—failing to address core issues like governance structures, financial transparency, and regulatory adherence. 'It is made clear that in the event this Court finds that the affidavits which have been filed by them is only by way of a formality, the Court may impose heavy personal cost against them,' the justices remarked.

Two weeks were given to file revised, comprehensive affidavits, with consolidated documents supplied to all stakeholders via the Ministry of Education.

Contempt Against Union Education Ministry

The court also pulled up the Department of Higher Education for non-compliance with a prior April 20 order to provide a competent English stenographer to Dr Sharma's team. The initial appointee was deemed inadequate, leading to observations of 'tentative' contempt against the Secretary. The official must appear personally on May 18, with a strict deadline of May 5 for full compliance, or face proceedings without leniency.

An interim honorarium of Rs 4 lakh was approved for the monitoring team, signaling the court's commitment to robust oversight.

Photo by Michael Lee on Unsplash

Persistent Challenges in Private Higher Education

Private universities have proliferated in India, numbering over 400 state private institutions as per UGC records, alongside numerous deemed universities. They account for a significant share of the 4.33 crore students enrolled in higher education, with Gross Enrolment Ratio (GER) at around 28.4% in 2024, targeting 50% by 2035 under NEP 2020.

However, issues abound: exorbitant fees, capitation charges, inadequate infrastructure, unqualified faculty, and even fake degrees. Recent cases include courts ordering FIRs against private university officials for issuing bogus degrees. UGC flagged 54 private universities as defaulters in 2025 for non-compliance with public self-disclosure norms, and maintains a list of 32 fake universities, mostly in Delhi and Uttar Pradesh.

UGC's latest fake universities list highlights ongoing vigilance needs.

UGC's Limited Oversight and State Responsibilities

The University Grants Commission (UGC), established under the UGC Act 1956, regulates central universities effectively but has limited powers over state private universities. States grant 'university' status via legislation, often criticized for revenue motives rather than quality.

NEP 2020 envisions a single regulator—Higher Education Commission of India (HECI)—with four verticals for standards, funding, accreditation, and regulation. Implementation lags, exacerbating issues. Supreme Court interventions, like this case, fill the vacuum, demanding transparency on non-profit status, land allotments at nominal rates, and fee regulation.

• Statutory basis for establishment
• Governance and financial audits
• UGC monitoring mechanisms
• Benefits like tax exemptions and subsidies

State Variations and Compliance Gaps

Compliance varies widely. Some states like Maharashtra and Karnataka have robust private sectors but face fee hike protests. Others, like Uttar Pradesh with 30+ private universities, grapple with quality concerns. The court's consolidated table exposed incomplete answers on faculty-student ratios, research output, and placement data.

Technical glitches in the SC's e-filing portal delayed access, resolved by May 6. Petitioners can now share confidential inputs with monitors.

Implications for Students, Faculty, and Institutions

For students, this probe promises better protection against arbitrary policies, high fees, and substandard education. Faculty may see improved working conditions if governance strengthens. Institutions face heightened scrutiny, potentially curbing malpractices but raising compliance costs.

Experts view it positively: 'This is a wake-up call for lax regulation,' says a former UGC member. With enrollment growth at 26.5% since 2014-15, quality assurance is paramount.

AISHE 2024-25 report shows private sector's dominance in professional courses.

Photo by Claudio Schwarz on Unsplash

Path Forward: Reforms and Next Hearing

The May 18 hearing will review revised affidavits and Education Secretary's appearance. Potential outcomes include contempt rulings, stricter UGC guidelines, or a regulatory overhaul committee.

Stakeholders urge integrating NEP's graded autonomy, ABC (Academic Bank of Credits), and anti-profiteering measures. Collaborative state-UGC efforts could transform higher education.

In the interim, students should verify university status via UGC portal. This case exemplifies judicial activism ensuring education as a right under Article 21.