On July 27, three civil services aspirants drowned inside a coaching centre in Delhi. The incident has sent shock waves across the city because it shows the brazen manner in which the coaching centre had been flouting zoning regulations — they were using a basement for commercial activity. It’s also shocking that the Municipal Corporation of Delhi seems to have overlooked what was going on right under its nose.
The owner and the centre’s coordinator have been arrested and Delhi’s mayor has stated that running a library in that space is illegal, let alone a coaching centre. So, the first question is: How was this allowed to go on? When urgent written complaints had been received, why did the authorities ignore them? All that was needed was one visit to the premise and the sealing of the basement. This would have saved at least three young lives, besides not putting all coaching centres on notice. The failure to intervene at the right time and not monitoring the disposal of public complaints call into question the role of the zonal engineer and his superiors.
Unfortunately, TV debates and social-media commentary are unwittingly making light of the seriousness of the incident by diverting the conversation. The focus seems to be on whether the drains were clogged with silt, whether there was a deluge of water that inundated the basement, and whether all escape routes were blocked. Yet, what they should be asking is this: How was a coaching centre being run in a basement? Why was this glossed over?
The MCD building bylaws specify the activities permitted in basements. Running a coaching centre is not permissible. This is a matter involving criminal culpability. Heads must roll immediately, and not in the fullness of time. The zonal engineer and the staff responsible must be immediately suspended, and major penalty proceedings must be initiated and completed – including, if necessary, the dismissal of those responsible.
Simultaneously, the business of coaching centres must be addressed by all governments, the Central and states. Misleading advertisements, complaints about the quality of teaching, exorbitant fees, poor and/or dangerous infrastructure — a huge sub-sector of the informal economy is running in a laissez-faire way, across the country.
Some basic statistics will clarify the magnitude of the mess. More than one million aspirants compete for just around 1,000 seats in the civil services examination. In 2024, more than two million students attempted the medical entrance examination, NEET: Medical colleges in the country have a little more than 1 lakh seats. Three things are clear: First, the number of aspirants who seek coaching — from medical to engineering to chartered accountancy to the civil services examinations — is expanding. Second, the percentage of students doing well enough to make the grade is less than 0.1 per cent of the aspirants who sit for the examinations.
The focus seems to be on whether the drains were clogged with silt, whether there was a deluge of water that inundated the basement, and whether all escape routes were blocked. Yet, what they should be asking is this: How was a coaching centre being run in a basement? Why was this glossed over?
Third, those running coaching centres have cashed on this as a business opportunity. From the 99.9 per cent who will not make the grade, there will always be sufficient buyers — harried parents — who will pay for coaching in the hope that it will enhance, if not ensure, placement of their ward in a professional institution and subsequently, a job.
Governments have a huge responsibility to build awareness, improve regular schooling and college education and reduce dependency on coaching. Early this year, the Ministry of Education tried to confront the situation. But it perhaps sat back after issuing a set of “model guidelines” for the regulation of coaching centres. In a letter dated January 16, the Ministry’s Department of Higher Education issued a 13-page document recommending the registration and regulation of coaching centres. Since education is on the Constitution’s Concurrent List, it was left to the states to act within the available legal framework. Well-intentioned as the advisory was, in one stroke, coaching centres got catapulted under the umbrella of education when the activity is nothing short of a business.
At least in Delhi, the Centre’s guidelines seem not to have been heard of — let alone acted upon. The guidelines were sent to the University Grants Commission, All India Council for Technical Education, National Testing Agency, and NEET. It was even sent to the Ministry of Health and Family Welfare along with all state agencies responsible for education. There is much confusion about whose responsibility coaching centres would be. They are ubiquitous — across schools, general, technical and professional education, each of which has its own hierarchies — sometimes even headed by different ministers. All this raises a fundamental question: Are coaching centres imparting education or conducting business? None of the education organisations to whom the guidelines have gone, seem to have any authority or wherewithal to regulate coaching centres.
To be fair, the model guidelines are well-intentioned. Apart from the publication of misleading advertisements, they prescribe minimum space requirements per student, require the display of updated details of the qualification of the tutors, the courses run, the fees being charged, the number of students who took admission in the past and succeeded, along with a section on adherence to fire, building and safety codes. There is also a suggestion that in case of violation of the terms of registration, the coaching centre would be liable for penalties on a graded scale, even suggesting the quantum of (paltry) fines but backed by powers of a civil court. However, if policing coaching centres becomes the responsibility of the education department, one thing is certain: The MCD, which bears direct responsibility for regulating activities in residential and mixed land-use areas, can hang up its boots.
My suggestion: Without any delay, act against the officers and staff of the MCD who failed to check and stop the misuse of this basement. Second, do not bring coaching centres under the mantle of state education departments because that will legitimise what is clearly a business, and confer credibility to the idea that they are imparting education. Registration and licensing are needed but they should be administered exactly as is done for scores of activities that require oversight — gyms, swimming pools, theatres and cinema halls.
-The writer is a former health secretary and former chief secretary of Delhi.
