Gujarat University (GU) in Ahmedabad finds itself in a regulatory tangle after its recent move to set up a board of studies for allied and healthcare courses was challenged. The Gujarat State Allied and Healthcare Council has raised serious concerns about the eligibility of the appointed members and has directed the university to urgently reconstitute the boards.
New Framework, New Boards
This development follows a significant shift in the regulatory landscape for paramedical education in India. For a long time, decisions concerning courses like physiotherapy and optometry were handled by traditional medical boards. However, the formation of the National Commission for Allied and Healthcare Professions (NCAHP) introduced a new, specialized regulatory framework. Under this new system, universities across the country were instructed to establish separate boards of studies dedicated to different allied and healthcare disciplines.
Acting on these national directives, Gujarat University announced the formation of an ad hoc six-member board of studies. This board included the dean of the medical faculty, Dr. Rashmikant Dave, alongside professors and principals from various fields. The university formalized this step by issuing an official notification announcing the board's creation.
Council Flags Major Eligibility Issues
The move, however, quickly hit a roadblock. The Gujarat State Allied and Healthcare Council, the state-level regulatory body, examined the board's composition and lodged formal objections. In a letter sent to the university, the council clearly stated that members appointed to such crucial academic boards must belong specifically to the allied and healthcare sector. Furthermore, they should be actively engaged in academic work directly related to the concerned discipline.
According to the council's assessment, only one member, Jayshree Sutariya, currently meets these stringent qualifications. The eligibility of the remaining five members was found to be questionable and not in full compliance with the mandated criteria. This finding puts the legitimacy of the newly formed board in doubt.
Recommendations and Potential Repercussions
The council did not stop at pointing out the flaws. It provided clear recommendations for corrective action. It advised the university to reconsider the current appointments. More importantly, it instructed GU to constitute separate boards of studies for each of the 10 professional categories specified by the NCAHP, but only for disciplines where relevant courses are actually offered by the university.
This directive could have significant operational implications for Gujarat University. Instead of a single, overarching board, the university may now be required to form multiple discipline-specific boards. This would mean creating dedicated academic bodies for fields such as physiotherapy, optometry, and other allied health sciences taught at the institution, ensuring each is governed by truly qualified experts from that field.
The university's next steps are now keenly awaited. It must decide whether to defend its initial selections or comply with the council's directive to dissolve and reconstitute the boards, a process that could delay academic decisions for these critical healthcare programs.
