From autonomy to Central control? Draft ISI Bill 2025 drops reference to ‘national development’ Premium

The Ministry of Statistics and Programme Implementation (MoSPI) has invited suggestions from the public on the draft Indian Statistical Institute Bill, 2025, as part of the pre-legislative consultative process, open until October 24. The draft Bill proposes major structural reforms to the Indian Statistical Institute (ISI), a 94-year-old premier institution synonymous with India’s early efforts to use Statistics for policy and development, founded by Prasanta Chandra Mahalanobis.

The draft Bill seeks to transform the Institute from a registered society into a statutory body corporate; to redefine its objectives from a nation-building and welfare-oriented mission to one centred on global excellence, institutional branding, and innovation; and to overhaul its governance framework by replacing its internally elected council with a government-nominated board of governance, similar to institutions such as the Indian Institutes of Technology (IITs). Once enacted, the Bill will replace the Indian Statistical Institute Act, 1959.

Since its founding, four major committees have reviewed the ISI’s functioning with some of their recommendations implemented and others left unaddressed by the institute. The most recent, chaired by R. A. Mashelkar in 2020, was sharply critical of what it described as the Institute’s gradual stagnation, observing that it had “lost much of its earlier brilliance” and recommending “radical changes” to restore its dynamism. According to the Ministry of Statistics and Programme Implementation (MoSPI), the current draft Bill draws upon these recommendations to “modernise the Institute’s structure” as it approaches its centenary in 2031.

The Act was amended only once, in 1995, to expand the list of subjects in which the institute could grant degrees. The current effort marks the most significant set of changes since the original 1959 Act. While some professors serving or formerly associated with the institute view these changes as a necessary adaptation to contemporary realities, others see them as the beginning of a dilution of the institute’s autonomy, and, by extension, an erosion of the Nehruvian-era institute.

Origins of the Nehruvian institute

In his memoirs, C. R. Rao, who studied under P. C. Mahalanobis and later served at the institute for more than four decades to become one of the world’s most acclaimed statisticians, recalls that Statistics as a discipline was virtually unknown in India in the early twentieth century. “There was no teaching or research in Statistics at the universities,” he wrote, “no statistical society and no journal of statistics.” What little data existed were mere by-products of the colonial administration.

It was in this void, around 1931, that Mr. Mahalanobis and a group of young colleagues conceived the idea of a centre devoted entirely to statistical research and its application to practical problems. From a small statistical laboratory in Mahalanobis’ room at Presidency College, Calcutta, the idea took institutional shape through a public meeting in December 1931 and the formal registration of the Indian Statistical Institute on 28 April 1932 as a non-profit learned society under the Societies Registration Act (XXI of 1860).

In the post-Independence period, the institute grew rapidly, supported by first Prime Minister Jawaharlal Nehru, Finance Minister C. D. Deshmukh, and Pitambar Pant, Mr. Nehru’s secretary and later a close associate of Mr. Mahalanobis in Delhi. Mr. Rao notes that this remarkable expansion, from a single laboratory to a network of branches across the country, owed much to Mr. Mahalanobis’ “imaginative planning.”

As historian Nikhil Menon observes in his book Planning Democracy: How a Professor, an Institute, and an Idea Shaped India, while addressing a gathering of Chief Ministers at Hyderabad House in 1954, Mr. Nehru remarked that India had for a while been “groping in the direction of planning.” The nation had been stumbling forward, like a person blindfolded, because until recently it did not “have all the information, data, [and] statistics which are essential for planning.” Earlier, they “just did not have enough data,” but now, “we have got much more; we are at a stage, a definite stage.”

Mr. Menon further notes that by the late 1950s, “the data infrastructure had percolated too deep into planning and the processes of State.” Mr. Mahalanobis’ pioneering work in Statistics and data-based planning shaped national policies, including the establishment of the National Sample Survey and his role in formulating the Second Five-Year Plan for the erstwhile Planning Commission.

In 1959, Mr. Nehru successfully steered the Indian Statistical Institute Bill through Parliament, urging everyone to recognise the work being done at the institute. He called it “of the utmost importance,” adding that “there can be no planning without statistical work on a big scale.”

This vision culminated in the Indian Statistical Institute Act, 1959, which declared the ISI an autonomous institution of national importance and empowered it to grant degrees. Importantly, however, the institute continued to function as a registered society, with its affairs managed by a General Body. Its Memorandum of Association (MoA), Regulations, and Bye-laws together formed the institutional framework governing the society’s operations.

Changing the structure and autonomy

When the ISI functioned as a registered society, its governance structure was based on a system of membership and internal elections. The institute had three classes of members — regular Members, Student Members, and Institutional Members, all admitted by the council following the procedures laid down in the bye-laws. From among its members, a person who had rendered distinguished service to the nation or to the advancement of Statistics could be elected as the President of the Institute for a two-year term.

The Council serves as the governing body of the institute and was composed of 33 members — including six government representatives, nine scientists not employed by the Institute, five elected representatives of the Institute, and twelve ex officio members, such as the Director and the Professors-in-Charge of divisions, and Heads of different centres. The Council elects its Chairman for a two-year term from among eminent persons outside.

The appointment of the Director for a five-year term shall be made by the Council on the recommendation made by a Selection Committee consisting of the Chairman of the Council (as Chairman) and two experts approved by the Council. In essence, under the society framework, the Council held the central decision-making authority, combining academic, administrative, and financial powers, and maintaining a significant degree of internal autonomy in the institute’s governance, as the government had only six nominees in the council. However, Sections 7, 11, and 12 of the ISI Act, 1959 vest the Central Government with reserve powers of approval, direction, and control. 

Under Section 7, any fundamental change, such as amending the institute’s objectives, memorandum, or regulations, or disposing of property acquired with government funds, requires prior government approval. Section 11 empowers the Government to issue binding directions in the public interest, including amending the institute’s rules or altering its work priorities. Section 12 goes further, authorising the Government to take control of the institute if the Council fails to comply with such directions or is found to have abused its powers.

Radical overhaul

Under the Draft Indian Statistical Institute Bill, 2025, the governance structure of the Institute will undergo a complete change. Once enacted, the ISI will cease to function as a registered society governed by a General Body and elected Council. Instead, its governance will vest in a Board of Governance, established under Chapter III of the Bill, which will serve as the highest executive authority of the Institute.

At the apex of the new structure is the Visitor, who shall be the President of India. The Visitor will have the power to review the Institute’s work, order inspections or inquiries, and issue such directions as deemed necessary on the basis of those reviews.

Below the Visitor, the overall administration and control of the Institute will rest with the Board of Governance, which replaces the earlier Council. The Board will now consist of 11 members for a three year term mainly of Central Government nominees — including the Chairperson (appointed by the President on the recommendation of the central government), one representative from the Ministries of Statistics, Education, and Finance, and three eminent persons nominated by the Union Government. Importantly, only three members from within the institute will serve on the Board — the Director, the Dean of Studies, and one Head of Centre.

The Board will be responsible for framing policies, approving budgets, creating and abolishing posts, managing property and funds, and overseeing all academic and administrative matters. It will have the power to make regulations for the Institute’s functioning.

“At the ISI, we’ve had a certain degree of independence, and elections and council, a very democratic setup. That goes more naturally with the spirit of a free market and free choice,” one professor said. “Central control, on the other hand, would go against that spirit.”

Another academic said that the government’s attempt to impose tighter administrative control over the ISI runs contrary to its own stated belief in reducing State intervention. “When the government says it wants to move away from planning, it is essentially saying it wants to move away from control,” the professor noted. “So, if it now tries to impose more control over the ISI, that would be contradictory.”

However, other professors opine that the society structure has weakened the institute over the last five decades, allowing political cliques and internal power centres to emerge in the name of elections and council representation. “Independence doesn’t mean you can do whatever you want with public money and face no questions,” one professor said. “The ISI receives the majority of its funding from the government, and no one can expect full financial dependence and complete freedom at the same time.”

No claim to serving national development

As per the Memorandum of Association, the objectives of the institute are fourfold. First, to promote the study and dissemination of knowledge of Statistics, to develop statistical theory and methods, and to apply them in research and practical work, particularly in matters relating to “national development and social welfare.”

Second, to undertake research in the natural and social sciences, with the aim of fostering the mutual development of statistics and these disciplines. Third, to collect information and conduct investigations, projects, and operational research for purposes of planning and for improving the efficiency of management and production. And finally, to undertake any other ancillary activities necessary to achieve these objectives.

The Draft ISI Bill, 2025 omits all explicit references to national development, social welfare, and planning that were central to the earlier objectives. In their place, it introduces new priorities such as global excellence, interdisciplinary collaboration, innovation, and financial self-sustainability.

The Bill aims to ensure that the institute functions as a centre of global excellence for the study of statistical sciences and allied fields. It seeks to advance and disseminate knowledge in these disciplines and to foster interdisciplinary research across Statistics, Mathematics, Economics, Computer Science, and other related areas. The institute is also tasked with developing innovative educational methodologies and establishing cutting-edge research facilities.

Further, it seeks to enhance collaboration between industry, academia, and government to promote the practical application of knowledge for public interest. Another stated objective is to generate and manage resources effectively, with the aim of becoming financially self-sustaining to the extent possible. Finally, the institute may undertake any activities conducive to establishing itself as a globally recognised centre of excellence.

A global trend

“Mahalanobis’s legacy is strictly rooted in the line of planning — and that, the government abandoned long ago,” said one senior academic, referring to the dismantling of the Planning Commission and the shift towards NITI Aayog. “The government today does not believe in control anymore; it depends on a market economy.”

Another professor explained that in the earlier planning era, the State played a directive role in determining “what to produce, how much to produce, and where to produce,” with large public-sector enterprises like Rourkela, Durgapur, and Bhilai embodying the planned development model. “Those days are gone. Now we have a market-driven system with private enterprises. This shift is not unique to India; it’s a global trend,” he added.