40 SOCIAL SCIENTIST by the private trusts will breed social differences. This proposal has two implications. Firstly, the pressure for admission to the university, and subsequently for jobs, would be eased if the college base of university education is narrowed by disowning of responsibility by the state to open colleges and by applying stricter rules for affiliation of private ones to the university. Secondly, because of automatic reservation of university education for the privileged section of society, (in the changed situation, the state will not come to the help of the poorer sections of society • by opening colleges for them), they will have to go either without college education or will have to be satisfied with correspondence education only. In this context, the scheme of individual scholarship is a sheer illusion. There is a marked political advantage (at least for the time being) for the government if it is able to, as it intends, reserve the universities and selected colleges for its own class elements by following a policy that keeps the poor people out, and allows the large number of these elements to tilt the balance in favour of the ruling classes. Apart from providing an illegitimate advantage to the privileged sections at the cost of the poor, the policy seeks to create a hurdle to the rising political consciousness among the literate people of the poorer sections. This educational strategy of the government has to be viewed along with some other proposals of the Gajendragadkar Committee which have been, and may be, incorporated in the individual Acts of various universities. The proposals to make the teachers' services contractual, to disallow them a free right to organise themselves into unions and to incorporate a peace clause in the Act are academically unjustifiable but politically meaningful. Through these undemocratic provisions, the government proposes to terrorise the teachers into silence. It has taken, therefore, two precautions : one, that the university community is largely composed of the upper classes and that there is as little infiltrati on of the inconvenient elements in the universities as possible; two, if at all these inconvenient elements get into the university somehow, they are to be disabled by the above provisions. Therefore, all these proposals are intended to oppose and undermine the development of any democratic movement and the articulation of a political belief which is opposed to that of the ruling classes. But, the fact that the government has to resort to legislation or administrative measures to counteract opposite political beliefs and the democratic movement in universities brings out its political bankruptcy and inadequacy. It cannot fight these new challenges politically. So, whenever expedient, it shifts the plane of fight and leans on the coercive powers of the State to counteract the democratic movement of the university community. Scope of Education That the present pattern of education in India has caused social imbalances and stratification hardly needs any reiteration. Every time a commission, appointed by the Government of India, addresses itself to the