RESERVATIONS IN PRIVATE INSTITUTIONS: SIGNIFICANCE, CHALLENGES, WAY FORWARD

Copyright infringement not intended

Picture Courtesy:  INDIAN EXPRESS

Context

The Parliamentary Standing Committee on Education recommended 27%, 15% and 7.5% reservation for OBC, SC and ST students, respectively, in private higher education institutions.

Constitutional Foundation

The 93rd Amendment Act (2005) empowered Parliament to extend caste-based quotas to private colleges and universities.

• It inserted Article 15(5) in the Constitution, allowing the state to make “special provisions” for SC, ST and OBC students in private educational institutions (other than minority-run).

No separate national law has been enacted, so private universities remain outside mandatory reservation unless states legislate.   

Judicial Intervention

The Supreme Court declared that reservation in private colleges is constitutionally valid if backed by law.

In P.A. Inamdar vs Maharashtra (2005): Court ruled that non-minority unaided private educational institutions were not obligated to follow state-mandated reservation policies in admissions. 

• However, the 93rd Constitutional Amendment overturned this decision by allowing the state to implement reservations in these institutions. 

Ashok Kumar Thakur vs Union of India (2008) and Indian Medical Association vs Union of India (2011) upheld OBC reservation in unaided institutions once authorized by law.

Pramati Educational and Cultural Trust vs Union of India (2014) restated that Article 15(5) is “constitutional and permissible”.

The Supreme Court upheld the 103rd Amendment (EWS quota) in private colleges, indicating that economic reservations can also be applied.

Current Scenario Analysis

Rapid private expansion: Private universities grew from 276 in 2015 to 523 by 2024, and now enroll about a quarter of all students (26% of total enrolment in 2021–22).

• Between 2014 and 2022, about 84% of the net enrollment growth in higher education occurred outside public universities, with private institutions leading this expansion.
• Growing population created demand for educational institutions, public sector struggled to keep pace with this demand, leading to the growth of the private sector.
• Private colleges offer higher quality education, including better infrastructure, innovative teaching methods, and a focus on skill development.
• India invests around 4.3% of its GDP in education, lower than the 6% recommended by the Kothari Commission, and New Education Policy 2020.

Deep underrepresentation: Marginalized groups are underrepresented in private campuses. For example, the Department of Higher Education said that about 40% of students at private HEIs are OBC, 14.9% are SC and 5% are ST.

• Top private institutions are even less diverse. A 2025 review of three “Institutions of Eminence” (BITS Pilani, O.P. Jindal Global, Shiv Nadar) found only 0.9% of their students were SC and 0.5% ST; OBCs made up 11%.

Systemic inequality: Many disadvantaged students attend overcrowded or underfunded public colleges due to high fee structure in private college.   

• A parliamentary committee stated that the lack of reservations in private higher education is an “impediment” to social justice.

Parliamentary Committee Report 2025

In August 2025, a Parliamentary Standing Committee (Education) recommended enacting a law to mandate quotas in private universities.

The committee called for 27% OBC, 15% SC, and 7.5% ST reservations in private higher education, matching norms in public institutions.

It mentioned Article 15(5) and Supreme Court rulings (IMA and Pramati) to stress that such quotas are constitutionally allowed.

It proposed the financial model: any reserved seats in private colleges must be “fully covered” by government funding, similar to the 25% school quota under Right To Education Act.

It urged creating dedicated government funds to expand seats, hire faculty, and improve infrastructure in colleges implementing reservations – ensuring general seats are not cut.

Challenges and Obstacles

Financial burden: Private colleges charge high fees, and quotas would mean either revenue loss or the need for government subsidies. Without clear funding, they cannot maintain quality or may freeze seats.

Institutional autonomy: Mandatory quotas violate on private management rights. This already led to legal battles (e.g. minority-run colleges claiming Article 30 rights to avoid reservations).

• Lack of any existing law means each state or institution could interpret rules differently.
• In Maharashtra, a recent attempt to apply quotas in minority junior colleges was halted by the courts and then withdrawn, showing implementation hurdles.

Implementation complexity: Rolling out quotas requires administrative changes (revising admission forms, outreach to candidates, entrance exam adjustments) and support systems (remedial classes, financial aid).

Political resistance: Reservation policy is politically sensitive. Any move to extend quotas can face opposition or be delayed in the “intermediate space” of politics.

• Private educational lobbies have resisted earlier attempts (e.g. the stalled 2019 bill on private quotas), fearing it could deter investment.
• Recent cases in state governments (like Maharashtra’s rollback of new reservation policies under political pressure)

Data and accountability: Without a law or clear mechanism, there is currently no consistent tracking of caste data in private institutions.

• Parliamentary committee compiled figures from a few IoEs, but a nationwide audit of private colleges’ student profiles is lacking, hard to plan or evaluate any policy change.

International Models

Brazil (Racial/Economic quotas): Since 2012, Brazil requires that at least half of seats in public universities be reserved for students from disadvantaged racial or low-income backgrounds.

• These quotas extended to private universities via scholarships (e.g. the PROUNI program requires eligible private colleges to offer spots or tuition aid).  

Europe and UK (Equality policies): Most Western countries prohibit quotas by law but impose strong anti-discrimination rules.

• Private colleges set voluntary diversity targets or run scholarship schemes for underprivileged students, but there are no government-enforced quotas for caste or similar categories.

Malaysia (Bumiputra policies): Reserves spots in public universities and certain private institutions for Bumiputra (ethnic Malay) students, with scholarships.

South Africa (B-BBEE and quotas): South Africa’s Broad-Based Black Economic Empowerment (B-BBEE) policy enforces racial inclusion in higher education, but there is no special constitution-based quota for students. Universities voluntarily set race-based enrollment goals.

These examples show that few democracies mandate quotas in fully private education; many use public law and provide incentives or market adjustments.

Way Forward Strategy

Enact National Legislation: Parliament should pass a law under Article 15(5) to formalize quotas in private higher education.

• Law must specify the percentages (27% OBC, 15% SC, 7.5% ST as proposed) and clearly define beneficiaries.

Ensure Funding and Incentives: Government must finance the expansion of reserved seats so private colleges do not cut general seats. The RTE school model suggests reimbursing fees for quota students.

• Parliamentary committee recommended dedicated funds for infrastructure and faculty in implementing colleges.
• Government can provide grants or tax breaks for private universities meeting quota targets.

Strengthen Public Institutions: Parallel investment in government colleges, to improve public university capacity and quality, provides alternatives for disadvantaged students and prevents overreliance on private slots.

Mandate Scholarships and Support: Private colleges should provide freeships or scholarships to reserved-category students and possibly preparatory courses. This lowers the financial barrier for quota admits.  

• CSR funds can be utilised to provide scholarships and educational support for marginalized individuals in private institutions.

Data and Oversight: Establish a monitoring mechanism to collect and publish demographic data on private college students. Regular audits would track progress and enforce compliance, help adjust policies over time.

Phased Implementation: A gradual rollout (for example, initial focus on OBC or professional courses) could ease the transition. Pilot scheme in select institutions before full scale-up.  

Build Political Consensus: Politicians and stakeholders must openly discuss the benefits of inclusive education. Civil society and student groups can raise awareness of the justice rationale.  

Conclusion

By combining legislative action with financial planning and capacity building, India can extend the promise of social justice to private campuses. Ensuring reserved seats do not come at the cost of educational quality or general seats. A data-driven, phased approach under strong political will can help realize the constitutional vision of equal opportunity for all.

Source: INDIAN EXPRESS