New Delhi, August 22, 2025 – A landmark report by the Parliamentary Standing Committee on Education, Women, Children, Youth and Sports has called for mandatory reservations for Scheduled Castes (SCs), Scheduled Tribes (STs), and Other Backward Classes (OBCs) in private higher educational institutions (HEIs) across India. Tabled in Parliament on August 20, 2025, the 370th Report, titled Implementation of Article 15(5) of Indian Constitution regarding Special Provision for Reservation to SCs/STs and OBCs in Educational Institutions including Private Educational Institutions, emphasizes the constitutional permissibility and urgent need for such quotas to address the “abysmally low” representation of marginalized communities in private universities. Led by senior Congress leader Digvijaya Singh, the bipartisan panel has proposed sweeping reforms to promote social justice and equitable access to education, spotlighting the financial and systemic barriers faced by underprivileged students.
Dismal Representation in Private HEIs
The committee’s findings reveal stark disparities in the enrollment of marginalized communities in private HEIs. Government data from the All-India Survey on Higher Education (AISHE) 2022-23 indicates that SC students constitute 15.5% (67.87 lakh), ST students 6.4% (28.25 lakh), and OBC students 38.9% (1.7 crore) of the total 4.38 crore students enrolled in higher education across public and private institutions. However, private universities paint a far grimmer picture. For instance, at Birla Institute of Technology and Science (BITS) Pilani in 2024-25, only 514 out of 5,137 students (10%) were OBCs, 29 (0.5%) were SCs, and a mere 4 (0.08%) were STs, with some students not declaring their category. Similarly, O.P. Jindal Global University reported just 28 SCs and 29 STs out of 3,181 students (less than 1% each), while Shiv Nadar University had 48 SCs (1.5%) and 29 STs (0.5%) out of 3,359 students.
The report labels OBC representation as “considerably low” and SC/ST figures as “abysmally low,” attributing these gaps to high tuition fees that make private education unaffordable for marginalized sections. The panel noted that “substantial” annual fees act as a significant barrier, limiting opportunities for social mobility through education.
Private Sector Dominance and Public Sector Constraints
India’s higher education landscape is heavily reliant on private institutions. According to AISHE 2021-22, 65.3% of colleges are private unaided, with 517 private universities compared to 240 central and 445 state institutions. The committee highlighted that the public sector alone cannot accommodate the growing student population, particularly with the National Education Policy (NEP) aiming for a 50% Gross Enrolment Ratio (GER) in higher education. This makes private HEIs critical for meeting demand, necessitating inclusive policies to ensure equitable access for all communities.
Constitutional and Judicial Support
The panel’s recommendations are firmly rooted in Article 15(5) of the Indian Constitution, introduced via the 93rd Constitutional Amendment in 2006. This provision empowers the State to implement special measures for SCs, STs, and Socially and Educationally Backward Classes (SEBCs) in admissions to educational institutions, including private ones (excluding minority institutions). The Supreme Court’s 2014 ruling in Pramati Educational and Cultural Trust v Union of India upheld the constitutional validity of Article 15(5), reinforcing its applicability to private HEIs. The committee cited this and other judicial pronouncements to assert that reservations in private institutions are not only permissible but essential for social justice.
Currently, private HEIs are not legally obligated to implement reservation policies, a gap the panel described as an “impediment to attaining social justice in this country.” While the Department of Higher Education noted that state governments are responsible for legislating reservations in state-established institutions, the committee urged a unified national approach through parliamentary legislation to enforce Article 15(5) comprehensively.
Key Recommendations for Reform
The committee proposed several actionable measures to address these disparities:
- Legislation for Mandatory Quotas: Parliament should enact a law mandating 27% reservation for OBCs, 15% for SCs, and 7.5% for STs in private HEIs, aligning with the Central Educational Institutions (Reservation in Admission) Act of 2006 applicable to IITs, IIMs, and central universities.
- Government Financial Support: To mitigate financial burdens on private institutions, the government must fully fund the implementation of these quotas, following the model of the 25% reservation in private schools under Section 12(1)(c) of the Right to Education (RTE) Act, 2009, where fees are reimbursed. The panel also recommended dedicated funds for increasing seats, infrastructure, and faculty to ensure no reduction in general category seats.
- Creamy Layer Principle: For OBC reservations, the “creamy layer” principle should be enforced, with regular updates to income and eligibility criteria to target the most disadvantaged individuals.
- Awareness Campaigns: The government should collaborate with NGOs and community leaders to conduct outreach programs in remote areas, informing marginalized students about educational opportunities.
- Central Oversight Mechanism: A monitoring body involving the University Grants Commission (UGC), National Commission for Backward Classes, and SC/ST Commissions should be established to ensure compliance, with private HEIs required to submit annual admission data.
Focus on Institutions of Eminence
The report paid special attention to private Institutions of Eminence (IoEs), of which India has 10 private and 10 public institutions recognized for their potential to achieve world-class standards. Data from three private IoEs—BITS Pilani, O.P. Jindal Global University, and Shiv Nadar University—showed ST representation below 1% in each, highlighting the need for urgent reforms even in elite institutions.
Political Reactions and Context
The report has sparked significant political discourse. Congress general secretary (communications) Jairam Ramesh called on the Modi government to act swiftly, stating, “The ball is now in the government’s court.” He emphasized that the demand for reservations in private HEIs, also featured in the Congress’s 2024 Nyay Patra manifesto, is “no longer possible to ignore.” The bipartisan nature of the panel, chaired by Digvijaya Singh, lends weight to its recommendations, signaling cross-party support for educational equity.
The report’s release coincides with a politically charged atmosphere, with ongoing debates in the Lok Sabha’s Monsoon Session. Recent headlines, including NDA’s VP pick CP Radhakrishnan, Shashi Tharoor’s humorous response to a saree clip, Pakistan’s Asim Munir’s claims, Israel’s ambassador’s retort to Priyanka Gandhi, Amit Shah’s bills on jailed PMs/CMs, Opposition reactions to PM Modi’s Independence Day speech, Mahindra Group’s response to threats against a BJD MP, and the KBC controversy involving officers Sofiya Qureshi and Vyomika Singh, reflect the broader socio-political context in which this educational reform is unfolding.
Why It Matters: Addressing Systemic Inequities
The committee underscored that education is a critical tool for social justice, and the absence of reservations in private HEIs undermines this goal. High fees and lack of quotas have systematically excluded marginalized communities, perpetuating inequality. By implementing Article 15(5) through legislation, the government can ensure that private institutions, which play a dominant role in higher education, contribute to inclusive growth.
The AISHE 2022-23 data highlights progress in overall representation but exposes the private sector’s lag. With SCs at 15.5%, STs at 6.4%, and OBCs at 38.9% of total enrollments, the disparity in private HEIs is glaring. As India strives for a 50% GER under NEP, reforms in private education are critical to accommodating diverse student populations.
Looking Ahead
The Parliamentary Committee’s 370th Report marks a pivotal moment in India’s pursuit of equitable education. By advocating for mandatory reservations, government funding, and robust oversight, it aims to dismantle barriers for SC, ST, and OBC students. If implemented, these reforms could transform private HEIs into inclusive spaces, aligning with India’s constitutional commitment to social justice. As debates continue in Parliament, the nation awaits the government’s response to this clarion call for change.
Frequently Asked Questions (FAQs)
1. What is the main recommendation of the Parliamentary Committee’s 370th Report?
The Parliamentary Standing Committee on Education, Women, Children, Youth and Sports recommends that Parliament enact legislation to mandate reservations in private higher educational institutions (HEIs) across India, specifically 27% for Other Backward Classes (OBCs), 15% for Scheduled Castes (SCs), and 7.5% for Scheduled Tribes (STs). This aligns with the Central Educational Institutions (Reservation in Admission) Act of 2006 and aims to address the low representation of marginalized communities in private universities.
2. Why is there a need for reservations in private higher education institutions?
The committee highlighted the “abysmally low” representation of SCs and STs and “considerably low” OBC enrollment in private HEIs, citing data from institutions like BITS Pilani (10% OBC, 0.5% SC, 0.08% ST) and O.P. Jindal Global University (less than 1% SC/ST). High tuition fees make private education unaffordable for marginalized communities, and the private sector’s dominance (65.3% of colleges are private unaided, per AISHE 2021-22) necessitates inclusive policies to meet the National Education Policy’s 50% Gross Enrolment Ratio target.
3. What constitutional and judicial basis supports reservations in private HEIs?
The recommendations are grounded in Article 15(5) of the Indian Constitution, introduced via the 93rd Amendment in 2006, which empowers the State to implement reservations for SCs, STs, and Socially and Educationally Backward Classes in private educational institutions (excluding minority institutions). The Supreme Court’s 2014 ruling in Pramati Educational and Cultural Trust v Union of India upheld the constitutional validity of Article 15(5), reinforcing its applicability.
4. How does the committee propose to address financial concerns for private institutions?
The committee suggests that the government fully fund the implementation of reservations in private HEIs, following the model of the 25% quota in private schools under the Right to Education Act, 2009, where fees are reimbursed. It also recommends allocating dedicated funds for increasing seats, infrastructure, and faculty to ensure no reduction in general category seats, easing the financial burden on private institutions.
5. What measures are proposed to ensure compliance and outreach for the reservation policy?
The committee proposes establishing a central oversight body involving the University Grants Commission (UGC), National Commission for Backward Classes, and SC/ST Commissions to monitor compliance, with private HEIs required to submit annual admission data. Additionally, it calls for awareness campaigns in collaboration with NGOs and community leaders to inform marginalized students in remote areas about educational opportunities. The “creamy layer” principle for OBCs, with regular updates to eligibility criteria, is also recommended to target the most disadvantaged.
