Syllabus: Statutory, regulatory and various quasi-judicial bodies.
Background: Existing Structure of the ISI
- The Indian Statistical Institute (ISI) was founded by P.C. Mahalanobis in 1931 as a statistical laboratory at Presidency College.
- It was registered as a society under the Societies Registration Act, 1860 and later under the 1961 West Bengal Act.
- It was declared an Institution of National Importance in 1959, enabling it to grant degrees and receive Central funding.
- ISI is headquartered in Kolkata, with centres in Delhi, Bengaluru, Chennai and Tezpur, offering programmes in statistics, mathematics and research disciplines.
- Governance is through a 33-member Council, comprising:
- An elected Chairman, six Central government representatives, external scientists, a UGC representative, and ex-officio members such as the Director and division heads.
- The Director, the academic and administrative head, is appointed by the Council.
Key Provisions of the Draft ISI Bill, 2025
- Converts ISI from a registered society into a statutory body corporate through an Act of Parliament.
- Introduces a new Board of Governance (BoG) structure resembling IIT/IIM governance models.
- President of India becomes the Visitor with oversight powers.
- BoG composition: Chairperson nominated by the Visitor, Central government representatives, eminent persons nominated by the Centre, and institute representatives.
- BoG empowered to take decisions on administration, degree granting, appointments, regulations and rules.
- Creates an Academic Council of division and centre heads led by the Director, functioning in an advisory capacity to the BoG.
- Director to be appointed by the BoG Chairperson from a panel recommended by a search-cum-selection committee formed by the Union government.
- Visitor empowered to remove the Director, order inquiries and conduct periodic reviews.
- The Bill will replace the ISI Act, 1959 entirely.
Rationale and Opposition
- Government’s Stated Objective
-
-
- MoSPI claims the Bill aims to upgrade ISI’s status and modernise its governance framework, aligning it with other national institutions.
-
- Concerns Raised by Faculty and Students
-
- Strong apprehension about enhanced Central control and reduced institutional autonomy.
- New BoG heavily dominated by Central nominees, reducing the existing Council’s diverse representation.
- Increased government role in Director selection and removal, including periodic reviews, seen as undermining academic independence.
- Petition argues that reforms should amend the 1959 Act, not abolish the existing governance framework.
- Fear that BoG powers may override Academic Council decisions, weakening academic self-governance.
