Proposed Governance Bill Sparks Rift Between ISI Kolkata, Other Centres

Kolkata: A sharp administrative fracture has emerged within the ISI Council over a legislative proposal to transform the institute into a ‘Body Corporate’. At the heart of the conflict is a proposed government Bill that seeks to scrap the Nehru-era 1959 Act, sparking a standoff between ISI Kolkata and several other regional branches. While Kolkata members view the move as a centralised power grab that threatens academic freedom, a few proponents from other centres argue the change is a necessary reboot to bypass bureaucratic gridlock. 

The Council, ISI’s highest administrative decision-making body, met on Saturday to discuss the Bill proposed by the Narendra Modi government. The proposed law would replace the 1959 Act passed during Prime Minister Jawaharlal Nehru’s tenure and is aimed at restructuring ISI’s top-level governance.

According to participants present at the meeting, ISI Kolkata members opposed the proposal to replace the institute’s existing society-based structure, pointing to globally reputed institutions that follow similar governance models, including Germany’s Max Planck Institute and universities such as Oxford and Cambridge, and questioned Union ministry representatives on why ISI’s current structure needed to be altered.

“If the government had said, before framing this bill, which areas of ISI were, in their view, going wrong – what mistakes or irregularities were happening – then detailed discussions could have taken place. Instead, without doing any of that, we oppose this attempt to change everything and bring ISI’s entire governance system under its grip,” said Partha Pratim Majumder, Emeritus Professor, Indian Statistical Institute, Kolkata, India. 

At present, ISI’s governance is society-led: a registered society at the top (registered under the West Bengal Society’s Registration Act), followed by the Council, and then the Academic Council, the highest body on academic affairs.

Representatives from some other ISI centres supporting the Bill argued that the proposed Board of Governors could provide a leaner governance structure. They contended that because the Council is not a statutory body, ISI often has to consult the ministry for approvals, which, according to them, slows down decision-making. In that context, they argued that a statutory board could streamline governance. In response, ISI Kolkata sought examples of whether ISI’s decision-making had ever been delayed because of the present structure. The ministry representatives reportedly could not cite an instance.

The Council debate has unfolded amid growing faculty opposition at ISI’s Baranagar headquarters. Teachers and staff fear the Bill will weaken ISI’s autonomy and academic freedom by concentrating power in a board dominated by government nominees and by reducing the influence of existing academic bodies. One concern raised internally is that the Academic Council could be weakened if the board is empowered to introduce or discontinue courses.

“For years, freedom of thought has been established here, and there has been a democratic environment under ISI’s society rules, where differing opinions were welcomed and discussed. There was also room for qualified outsiders to become involved in governance gradually. Decisions were not imposed from above. Ideas rising from the grassroots were discussed at the highest level. This democratic framework is ISI’s pride, and there is now an attempt to take it away,” claimed protesting senior faculty member Debrup Chakraboty.

The ministry has said in a recent FAQ that the current governance model has limited potential for institutional reforms and growth, arguing that the size and composition of the existing council impede effective decision-making. The ministry also contends that a large council size, substantial internal representation, and many elected members can hinder decisions, because even a small group of dissenters can block key moves.

Faculty members opposing the Bill say it could make key positions, such as the Director and Deans, dependent on government approval. Teachers fear this would marginalise internal academic stakeholders and independent scientists, concentrating decision-making power with the government.

They also flag clauses that they believe would enable more sustained government intervention than the existing law, and point to the Bill’s stress on financial sustainability, resource generation and applied consultancy. Faculty members interpret this as an attempt to reshape ISI into a revenue-oriented institution, potentially diluting its long-standing character as a public-good research centre.

“Those who want to hand ISI over to government bureaucrats and turn it into a profitable corporate body should examine what makes ISI different from other institutions. This is precisely how it became a global centre of pride for the country. That’s why we have begun opposing the draft Bill, and we seek the moral support of everyone who cares about education,” said senior faculty member Arjit Bishnu. 

The protests have also highlighted what teachers describe as persistent staffing shortages. According to faculty members, ISI currently has around 220 teachers for about 1,800 students, while around 60 faculty posts and 360 staff posts remain vacant. They also said the institute presently has no Director in office, adding to administrative uncertainty.

For now, the future of this Institution of National Importance remains hanging in the balance, caught between its legacy of academic freedom and a new era of centralised control.

The Wire is now on WhatsApp. Follow our channel for sharp analysis and opinions on the latest developments.