The HRD minister has evidently had enough of the IIM talking back to him. There has been a series of faceoffs between the ministry and the IIMs, and the former has not always been able to bend the latter satisfactorily to its will. For a politician like Arjun Singh, or Murli Manohar Joshi before him, who cut his political teeth in times when the minister’s writ was unchallenged and unchallengeable, and who has resolutely stayed within the time warp ever after, this has been an intolerable situation. Bring on the law, says Singh, and let’s settle this once and for all. The individual Memorandum of Association — a tripartite agreement between the institution, HRD ministry and the state government that gives crucial leeway to the IIM — must go. It must be replaced with legislation that will set limits on the institutions’ financial and functional autonomy. In other words, a legal instrument to enable the ministry to enforce its writ on the IIM.

The euphemisms are all in place. The committee that will prepare the groundwork for the law is ostensibly being set up to “review” the IIMs’ functioning in the wake of “economic reforms”. Yet, the HRD ministry’s itchy fingers vis-a-vis the IIMs have been blatantly on show on at least three notable occasions in the recent past. First, in its bid last year to spike IIM Bangalore’s attempt to set up its first overseas campus in Singapore. Then, in the unsubtle attempt to force the OBC quota by law on the IIMs over and above their objections about its efficacy. And finally, after the Supreme Court stayed the quota earlier this year, the HRD ministry tried to arm-twist the institutions into putting on hold the entire admissions process — and not just the part that came under the quota —in an attempt to pressure the court.

... contd.