New selection criteria for renowned science prize: 176 scholars raise concern

On Tuesday, 176 academics wrote to the principal scientific advisor to the Government of India, voicing their concerns about the new selection criteria for the Vigyan Yuva Shanti Swarup Bhatnagar Award.

This came after 26 eminent scientists wrote to the principal scientific advisor on August 30 seeking information on the procedure followed in choosing the winners after media reports suggested that “unfair non-scientific considerations” had influenced this year’s list of awardees.

The Vigyan Yuva Shanti Swarup Bhatnagar Award is the rechristened avatar of the Shanti Swarup Bhatnagar Award, which has for over six decades been widely considered to be the most prestigious science award in India. It has now been made part of a larger group of science prizes called the Rashtriya Vigyan Puraskar.

This year, at least two prospective awardees recommended by an expert panel were dropped from the final list of winners. One of them is a vocal critic of the Narendra Modi-led government.

On Tuesday, the group of 176 academics wrote to Principal Scientific Advisor Ajay Sood echoing the concerns of their 26 colleagues.

“We are in agreement with the spirit, intent and the text of the letter sent by 26 of our colleagues,” they said. “We agree with them that the procedures and criteria for determining Rashtriya Vigyan Puraskars should be, and seen to be fully fair, transparent and free of extraneous considerations.”

The letter also said: “It has come to our notice that subsequent to [their] letter, the government has updated the selection criteria on its portal and the new version uploaded in the last couple of days adds a line that the Rashtriya Vigyan Puraskar Committee, chaired by you, submits its recommendations to the minister of Science and Technology.”

The 176 academics expressed concern that “the list of names declared as the award winners is not the same as the list recommended by RVPC”.

They pointed out that the expert panel can only “recommend” the names of prospective awardees to the president or prime minister and said that “this aspect of the process is not new at all”.

The letter added: “What is new however, is names getting dropped at the discretion of the [science and technology] minister – something that has been unheard of for all these years.”

The signatories expressed concern that this would set a precedent for the minister “to use unrestricted vetoes” to overrule the recommendation of the expert committee. “Academics disliked by the government for any reason may be sidelined from not just awards, but also scientific grants, recruitments, promotions, etc,” they said.