At the Brink

In the absence of corrective action, St Stephens College will lose its intellectual standing. Yet another outstanding institution will have been demolished by the arrogance of its governors

DILIP SIMEON/Hardnews/ DELHI

The recent controversy over admissions and appointments at St Stephens College (SSC) are symptomatic of a deep-rooted sickness. My own memories go back to the late 1960s when it had no minority reservation at all. Christians were barely seven or eight per cent of the student population. The Christian character of the college was gentle and understated. Today, the college has become the focus of avoidable controversies generated by its governors, more specifically by its clergy-dominated Supreme Council, which has embarked upon a course of wilful self-destruction. Their sectarian policies will transform the college to its detriment in a short span of time. Such a change will vitiate the atmosphere by generating communally charged debates among students and teachers, and will benefit neither the Christian community, nor enhance the reputation of the college management.
The decision to increase reservations for Christian students up to 50 per cent, and to keep 40 per cent of reserved places for adherents of the Church of North India, takes place amidst the clubbing together of the language of affirmative action and that of minority rights. The attempted reservation in 2007 for Dalit Christians was a tangential means of enforcing this mixed-up policy - tangential because no such category had been officially recognised. It is true that sociological data exists to show that many Christians belong to oppressed and educationally backward sections of society. Official commissions have noted this. The fact that Scheduled Caste status has been accorded to Dalit Sikhs and Buddhists strengthens their case, and arguments are pending before the Supreme Court.
We know that sensitive matters are often postponed via dilatory tactics - in this case, apparently, the government prefers to let the matter hang. Nonetheless, it is not wise for a college to enforce such a policy, for the simple reason that an informal certification of caste-cum-Christian status creates its own attendant problems. If SSC wanted to work for the upliftment of poorer Christians, other methods of identifying students from deprived backgrounds could have been devised.
Leaving this aside, the college's governors have not argued that all Christians are socially and educationally ‘backward'. To reserve such a large percentage for a community that comprises a little over two per cent of the population reeks of unfairness, especially as the college is totally dependent upon UGC funds. What is worse, when the college found it difficult to fill the reserved seats, the Supreme Council reduced cut-off percentages for Christian applicants to 60 per cent. In an institution that has attracted the highest-scoring school-leavers in the country, this decision was bound to have a depressing impact upon teachers and students.
There are scores of Christian-run schools in India. It is well within their capacities to encourage their best students to compete for positions in SSC without the benefit of segregated admissions. To change admission criteria for Christians -- when it is not even claimed that they need this privilege -- marks a dangerous precedent, quite apart from the matter of being outside the Council's purview. What if these students do not pass their annual exams? Will the Council ask teachers to grant them preferential grades?
The constitution of SSC includes a role for a Council, with control of "the religious and moral instruction of the students of the college and of all matters affecting its religious character as a Christian college". It is chaired by the Bishop of Delhi, and includes the head of the Delhi Brotherhood, the small monastic community that founded the college in 1881. Other members used to be respected Christian educationists or public figures. For decades, the Council functioned with a light touch, being responsible for the appointment of the principal (who must be a member of the Church of North India), and for the "religious character" of the college. The principal would report to the Council about daily assemblies (which included all-faith elements in prayers); religious and moral instruction (taught by staff of all faiths) and the chapel, which was not obligatory for anyone. For most of a century, the Council took no part in admissions policy or appointments. The Governing Body managed the college, and functioned in a secular way. The Council was excluded from academic and administrative matters.
As a former teacher (and devout Christian) has remarked, the ideal of a Christian college until recently meant "serving God through service of the nation, educating people of all faiths for useful citizenship". This liberal outlook has now been replaced by stridency and authoritarian behaviour. The developments of the past decade or so indicate a major shift in governance. Recently, the college's pro-tem principal introduced an illegal minority reservation in academic appointments, an area that has been blemished by persistent ad-hocery.
The authorities of SSC have taken their whimsical departures in academic and administrative matters to absurd limits. The confusion about the scope of the Supreme Council's powers needs to be squarely addressed. Saner members of the Christian community and responsible academics should ask for an inquiry into the question of whether the Council has transgressed its jurisdiction. In the absence of corrective action, SSC will soon lose its intellectual standing. And then, yet another outstanding institution will have been demolished by the arrogance of its governors.

The writer is Senior Research Fellow, Nehru Memorial Museum and Library, Delhi