24.1 Bare Act Provision
21. Returns and information.—The Commission shall furnish to the Central Government such returns or other information with respect to its property or activities as the Central Government may, from time to time, require.
24.2 Explanation
Section 21 requires UGC to furnish to the Government such returns as the government may require.[1] It is the Information Gateway for the Central Government. The UGC is legally bound to provide any report, data, or details about its property or its activities whenever the Government asks for them. The Commission has academic autonomy, it is still a State under Article 12. Therefore, the Central Government, which is accountable to Parliament, has a legitimate right to know how the Commission is functioning. This section ensures that the UGC does not become a state within a state and remains answerable to the executive.[2]
24.3 Critical Analysis
Procedural Delay: Section 21 often acts as a massive administrative burden that diverts the UGC from its core academic duties. Since the Government can require information from time to time, the UGC is frequently hit with urgent requests for data. Because many Indian universities still do not have integrated digital systems, the UGC must manually collect returns from hundreds of institutions to satisfy a single Government request.[3] This creates a chain of delay that halts policy-making at the Ministry level. Often, the information required under Section 21 is already present in the Annual Report under Section 18 or Audit under Section 19, yet the Return must be filed separately, leading to redundant paperwork.
Constitutional Validity and Ultra Vires: Section 21 is constitutionally sound as a mechanism of Executive Oversight. The Central Government conducts its business through various departments. Section 21 allows the Ministry of Education to exercise its oversight function effectively. A potential ultra vires situation arises if the Government demands returns on sensitive intellectual property or internal academic deliberations that are protected under the principle of Academic Freedom.[4] If a Government request under Section 21 is used to spy on dissenting academic voices rather than for legitimate national purpose under Section 20, it could be challenged as a violation of the Constitution.
Room for Misinterpretation: The phrase such returns or other information is dangerously broad. Without a defined list of what constitutes information, the Government can engage in fishing expeditions, demanding minute details of internal UGC employee files or specific grant-approval notes to find grounds for political interference. The Act mentions property, which traditionally means land and buildings. However, in 2026, information about property could be misinterpreted to include the data and research copyrights of universities funded by the UGC, leading to a clash over who owns academic data.[5]
Colonial Era Policy and Irrelevance: Section 21 is a classic Command and Control provision derived from the British Inspectorate model. In the colonial era, Returns were the only way the British in Delhi could control the vast education system. Today, this model is irrelevant because we live in the era of Big Data and Real-Time Analytics. Instead of furnishing returns on request, modern regulators use Open Data Portals like the AISHE portal, where information is updated in real-time. Section 21’s reliance on periodic returns is an archaic 1956 concept that ignores the speed and transparency required in 2026. Excessive reporting to the Central Government stifles the UGC’s ability to act as an independent mentor to universities.[6]
[1] Sam Higginbottom University Of Agriculture, Technology and Science vs University Grants Commission [AIR 2016 DELHI 29]
[2] Annamalai University V. Secretary to Government, Information and Tourism Department, [(2009) 4 SCC 590]
[3] “The digital dilemma in Indian higher education: Why trust hasn’t kept pace with technology”, Sheeba Chouhan, ET Education, Dt. 19.3.2026, available at: https://education.economictimes.indiatimes.com/news/higher-education/navigating-the-digital-dilemma-in-indian-higher-education-building-trust-in-technology/129649398, last visited on 20.3.2026
[4] “Academic Freedom In India A Status Report, 2020”, Nandini Sundar, The India Forum, Dt. 27.8.2020.
[5] “Intellectual property policies for universities”, Wipo Magazine, Dt. 1.11.2019, available at: https://www.wipo.int/en/web/wipo-magazine/articles/intellectual-property-policies-for-universities-41240, last visited on 19.3.2026
[6] Report of ‘The Committee to Advise on Renovation and Rejuvenation of Higher Education’, Yash Pal Committee Report, March 2009
