Viswaguru or Vice Guru? Crisis of Leadership in Indian Universities

India dreams of becoming Vikasit Bharat, a global Viswaguru—a teacher to the world. But how can a nation claim moral and intellectual leadership when its universities are headed by individuals who lack basic humanity, let alone academic integrity?

The uproar at Tezpur University, Assam, following the insensitive remarks of Vice Chancellor Prof. Shambhu Nath Singh on the death of beloved artist Zubeen Garg, is not an isolated incident. It reflects a deeper malaise—the politicization and degradation of higher education leadership.

Students and faculty protested not just against one remark, but against a consistent pattern of arrogance, corruption, and administrative opacity. Allegations against Prof. Singh range from financial irregularities and tender manipulation to questionable recruitment practices. Yet, no formal inquiry has been confirmed. Why?

Why are individuals with such controversial histories—some even forced to resign from previous posts—being appointed to lead central universities? What is the selection criteria? Who vets their credentials? And why does the Ministry of Education remain silent while students are compelled to appeal to the Visitor, the Governor, and the Chief Minister?

This is not about one university. It is about the soul of Indian academia. When the number of Vice Chancellor aspirants outstrips that of MLA candidates, we must ask: has the university become the new playground for power, wealth, and indulgence?

If Viswaguru is to be more than a slogan, India must cleanse the sanctum of education. Transparency, merit, and moral accountability must be demanded in every appointment. Otherwise, Vikasit Bharat will remain a dream built on hollow slogans and broken institutions.

A Crisis of Academic Governance

The apathy shown by Tezpur University Vice Chancellor Prof. Shambhu Nath Singh after Zubeen Garg’s death is emblematic of a deeper institutional crisis. Students and research scholars, disturbed by the VC’s insensitivity and broader administrative failures, have submitted a memorandum to the Hon’ble President of India, the Visitor of the University, demanding urgent intervention.

The memorandum, endorsed by the Tezpur University Teachers’ Association (TUTA) and supported by the Public Integrated Production Committee, Tezpur, lists grave concerns threatening the university’s academic integrity.

At its core lies the VC’s chronic absenteeism—reportedly spending nearly 70% of his tenure away from campus, mostly in Delhi, without applying for leave or delegating authority. This has triggered administrative paralysis, delayed decisions, and a steep decline in rankings. Once placed 5th in NIRF and among the top 600 in Times Higher Education, Tezpur University has now slipped outside the top 100 and disappeared from QS rankings.

Further allegations include financial irregularities—business-class foreign travel without approval, excessive TA/DA claims, and the purchase of a ₹1.5 lakh iPhone from university funds. Prof. Singh is also accused of securing full medical reimbursements “as per actuals,” bypassing CGHS norms and creating unfair disparities.

The Finance Office, run by an extended post-retirement incumbent, has been described as opaque, obstructive, and unprofessional. Research approvals are delayed, funds lack transparency, and no statutory advertisement has been issued for a new Finance Officer. The absence of a Pro-Vice Chancellor and a regular Registrar has further deepened the vacuum. Adding to the outrage is the creation of a new contractual post—Director, Computer Centre—drawing ₹2 lakh monthly plus perks without statutory sanction.

Meanwhile, faculty shortages, unresolved guest faculty contracts, and new academic programs launched without resources have undermined teaching quality. The larger question remains: how do individuals with such questionable histories secure appointments to lead India’s premier universities?

If India truly aspires to be a Viswaguru, the Ministry of Education must restore transparency, merit, and accountability in higher education governance.

Remote-Controlled Campuses

Attempts by Education Watch (EW) to contact Prof. Shambhu Nath Singh went unanswered. In an atmosphere charged with unrest and allegations, this silence is more than discourteous—it reflects a leadership style that thrives on evading accountability.

Despite vibrant student life on campus, the VC operates largely from Delhi. Is there an unseen authority guiding him—someone instructing him to suppress dissent and manage discontent? Or is this part of a larger pattern?

Prof. Singh is not alone. NEHU Vice Chancellor Shri P.S. Shukla is also reported to govern remotely from Delhi for extended stretches. Despite deputy administrators, these absentee VCs remain untouched by scrutiny. A former Hemvati Nandan Bahuguna University professor asked pointedly: “If universities are being run from Delhi, why not shift the campuses there?”

Over two decades, Vice Chancellors appointed through political settlements or bureaucratic patronage have routinely abandoned campuses, escaping to Delhi while institutions decay. The selection process, many argue, is no longer dominated by scholars but by academic power brokers. To expect such leadership to nurture education is naïve.

Until the Ministry of Education reforms the appointment process and restores merit, transparency, and accountability, Viswaguru will remain a hollow slogan—mocked by the very institutions entrusted with upholding it.

“Some individuals, like Prof. Shambhu Nath Singh, operate under the protective umbrella of influential mentors such as Prof. J.S. Rajput,” noted Dr. Viswanath Pandey, former Public Relations Officer of Banaras Hindu University.