SC Invokes Article 142 on Education Crisis

Context

The Supreme Court of India has issued a landmark judgment in the case of Amit Kumar v. Union of India, leveraging its powers under Article 142 of the Constitution to introduce nine binding directives aimed at addressing the systemic causes of student suicides in Higher Educational Institutions (HEIs). This ruling pushes institutional accountability to the forefront, moving beyond short-term welfare measures to demand comprehensive governance reforms. 

Overview: A Crisis of Quality and Access

The Court’s intervention was prompted by an acknowledgment of the “rapid expansion of higher education through privatisation without corresponding improvement in quality, infrastructure, and support systems.” This growth has resulted in institutions which in most cases are under-resourced, under-staffed and ill-equipped to meet the high academic demand and the mental health issues experienced by students. The resulting atmosphere is among the factors that lead to high levels of student distress and suicide in the country.

The Constitutional Mandate: Invoking Article 142

Article 142 gives authority to the Supreme Court to issue any order that it considers essential in administering full justice in any case that it has before them. Through this authority, the Court has avoided the normal bureaucratic delays and made nine binding directions to the Centre and the State governments which make it mandatory and an immediate implementation of all HEIs in the country.

Key Directives for Systemic Reform

The nine directives target core governance and welfare deficiencies within the higher education ecosystem:

A. Data Collection and Tracking

• Mandatory Reporting: HEIs are now mandated by law to report the cases of all student suicides to the local police departments instantly.
• Centralized Data: The National Crime Records Bureau (NCRB) and Sample Registration System (SRS) have the mandate of recording suicides in HEIs as opposed to the general population, which gives the correct national statistics.

B. Administrative and Governance Accountability

• Immediate Vacancy Filling: The Court mandated that all vacant administrative and faculty posts (Vice-Chancellors, Registrars and faculty) be filled under strict time limited deadlines. This will deal with the long term understaffing that undermines the quality of education and support students.
• Prompt Scholarship Disbursal: To ease the sufferer of financial strain all outstanding scholarships should be disbursed within 4 months of the order.

C. Health and Well-being Infrastructure

• 24/7 Health Care: All residential HEIs should have constant availability of qualified medical and mental health care.
• Strict Adherence to the Regulations: There should be strict adherence to the regulations that are provided on anti-ragging, anti-discrimination, anti-sexual harassment prevention and grievance redressal mechanisms.

D. Prevention and Postvention Protocols

• Staff Sensitization: Requirement training of all staff to sensitize them to observe any signs of distress and train them to offer first hand support to vulnerable students.
• National Protocol Development: A National Task Force has been instructed to develop a prototype Suicide Prevention and Postvention Protocol that can be used in all HEIs.

Implications for Governance and Policy

This verdict brings a crucial Indian policy of higher education. It transforms student mental health into an institutional responsibility as a necessity and not a welfare measure. The focus of the Court on governance modification, i.e., filling the leadership posts emphasizes how the judicial branch has come to realize that a healthy educational environment is conditional upon the presence of effective administration.

Future Protocols and Accountability

The Court instructed the National Task Force (NTF) appointed by the Court to establish a model of Suicide Prevention and Postvention Protocol or a Universal Student Well-being and Suicide Prevention Framework. This framework will have Standard Operating Procedures (SOPs) of:

• Well-being audits, periodically, and scores could be included in the NAAC accreditation grading.
• Staff and faculty sensitization and education.
• Mental health service on campus through a comprehensive and well-structured on-campus mental health provision with well-understood confidentiality policies and referral procedures.

The Union and State governments have been responsible to make sure that these directives are communicated and implemented immediately, failure to which they are supposed to have severe repercussions.

Source: The Hindu

Download as PDF