The ministry of health and family welfare has allowed as many as 67 ayurveda, unani and siddha medical colleges to admit students, despite the central regulatory body finding them not meeting even a watered-down standard imposed last year. The standards for permitting medical colleges in Indian medicine were diluted by a controversial one-page order of minister of state S Gandhiselvan on July 15, 2010. And new norms were notified ignoring the recommendations of regulator for the sector, the Central Council of Indian Medicine (CCIM), and the Supreme Court's observations, resulting in some 170 medical colleges being overnight qualified to admit students. The fresh information about the ministry further diluting norms to allow 67 colleges adds to the murkiness in the sector. In the wake of TOI's earlier report (''Another DMK minister courts controversy — Violated norms to clear Medical Colleges''; January 14), more stakeholders have come out, narrating details of arbitrariness and favouritism.
While the health ministry has denied the report, the sector's regulator CCIM has wondered why the ministry has ignored the government's own norms and allowed so many colleges to operate.In a letter, the ministry described the TOI January 14 report as ''factually incorrect'' while claiming that ''adoption of realistic criteria for the decision making process was in consonance with the spirit of the observations of the Hon'ble Supreme Court.'' The ministry also defended its decision to permit the 67 colleges to admit new students. In response to a questionnaire sent by TOI, the regulator CCIM has been forthright — it questioned the ministry's decision to grant ''permission to some colleges by deviating from the decided as well as adopted policy by the Government of India.'' It added that CCIM was the sole authority to prescribe minimum standards of education and ''no other authority, including the GOI'' could do so. On the issue of the 67 colleges that were allowed to admit students even though they did not meet standards, CCIM said it made recommendations against them based on details provided by colleges of ''daily average attendance of patients in OPD and bed occupancy in IPD between January 1 and December 31, 2009.'' The ministry, too, admitted that ''visitation reports in respect of the above mentioned 58 ayurveda, eight unani and one siddha college, the CCIM had either reported the deficiency of teacher as found on the day of visit or the OPD/IPD figures of 2009, were found below the criteria, as approved by the Central government for consideration during academic year 2010-11.'' These colleges were given an ''opportunity of hearing'' between July and November 2010, the ministry said. ''It was found that these colleges had achieved the laid down criteria from January 2010 onwards in respect of the deficiencies noted earlier,'' the ministry said. However, it did not explain how the January-December 2009 functionality on teaching faculty, and in and out patients could be assessed based on documents presented later. ''They just shifted the goal posts to accommodate the colleges,'' said a senior official.
Source:TNN
While the health ministry has denied the report, the sector's regulator CCIM has wondered why the ministry has ignored the government's own norms and allowed so many colleges to operate.In a letter, the ministry described the TOI January 14 report as ''factually incorrect'' while claiming that ''adoption of realistic criteria for the decision making process was in consonance with the spirit of the observations of the Hon'ble Supreme Court.'' The ministry also defended its decision to permit the 67 colleges to admit new students. In response to a questionnaire sent by TOI, the regulator CCIM has been forthright — it questioned the ministry's decision to grant ''permission to some colleges by deviating from the decided as well as adopted policy by the Government of India.'' It added that CCIM was the sole authority to prescribe minimum standards of education and ''no other authority, including the GOI'' could do so. On the issue of the 67 colleges that were allowed to admit students even though they did not meet standards, CCIM said it made recommendations against them based on details provided by colleges of ''daily average attendance of patients in OPD and bed occupancy in IPD between January 1 and December 31, 2009.'' The ministry, too, admitted that ''visitation reports in respect of the above mentioned 58 ayurveda, eight unani and one siddha college, the CCIM had either reported the deficiency of teacher as found on the day of visit or the OPD/IPD figures of 2009, were found below the criteria, as approved by the Central government for consideration during academic year 2010-11.'' These colleges were given an ''opportunity of hearing'' between July and November 2010, the ministry said. ''It was found that these colleges had achieved the laid down criteria from January 2010 onwards in respect of the deficiencies noted earlier,'' the ministry said. However, it did not explain how the January-December 2009 functionality on teaching faculty, and in and out patients could be assessed based on documents presented later. ''They just shifted the goal posts to accommodate the colleges,'' said a senior official.
Source:TNN
No comments:
Post a Comment