New Delhi: Heads of Departments (HoDs) of medical colleges could get a five-year tenure, instead of the earlier proposal of three years, under a revised plan being considered by the National Medical Commission (NMC), ThePrint has learnt. The revised proposal would also restrict the HoD position to professors, excluding associate professors who would have been eligible under the original draft.
M.K. Ramesh, president of NMC’s Medical Assessment and Rating Board (MARB), told ThePrint that the commission was reconsidering the three-year term plan after receiving feedback on its original proposal. Under the revised one, the senior-most professor would head a department for five years, after which the next professor in terms of seniority would get the opportunity, he said.
The original draft amendment to Postgraduate Medical Education Regulations, 2023—published in May 2025—had proposed rotating the HoD post every three years among eligible professors and associate professors based on seniority. About a year and a half later, the proposal remains unresolved.
Rotational headship means that the position of HoD changes hands among eligible faculty members after a fixed period. It was intended to allow other faculty members leadership opportunities, instead of one person continuing in the role for years until retirement or relinquishing the post. However, it drew objections over whether appointments should be based on seniority alone, or also take into account academic performance, research commitments and a department’s administrative needs.
Ramesh said NMC would have to restart the process with a fresh proposal, which would be moved shortly and would take no more than six weeks once initiated.
Under the existing practice, the senior-most eligible professor typically continues as HoD till retirement, or till they relinquish the position. A rotational system would have set a fixed tenure for the post, allowing other eligible faculty members to take over.
Also Read: NMC refuses to disclose information on action against private colleges over unpaid PG stipends
Concerns over selection criteria
The five-year tenure proposal does not resolve a central concern raised during earlier consultations: Should the HoD be chosen automatically on the basis of seniority, or should colleges assess candidates on merit and administrative ability?
Dr Anche Narayana Rao Dattatri, head of pharmacology at Karnataka Institute of Medical Sciences (KIMS), Hubballi said that appointments should follow a selection process rather than automatic rotation.
“I really feel it should be a selection process rather than mechanically rotating, replacing one set of HoDs with another set of HoDs,” he told ThePrint.
Dattatri added that a longer tenure could help departments maintain continuity, but the method of selecting the HoD remains important. He has previously supported a merit-cum-seniority approach, provided the selection criteria are announced in advance and faculty members are given time to meet them.
A senior doctor at a central government hospital, who did not wish to be named, questioned if a uniform rotational-headship policy could be applied across government medical institutions, which follow different administrative arrangements.
“Even in Delhi, rotational headship is not followed in most medical colleges and hospitals, including MAMC, GB Pant Hospital, UCMS and AIIMS. It is practised in only a few institutions. The NMC is a regulatory body, not an administrative authority, and government institutions are governed by their respective service rules,” the doctor told ThePrint.
“Even if the NMC’s order is issued, it would not automatically be binding on state or central government institutions that are governed by their own service rules, unless those rules are amended or the order passes litigation challenges.”
NMC’s earlier consultations also recorded negative responses to the mandatory rotation proposal. Of the 421 responses on the proposed clause, 249 opposed it and 172 supported it, according to a Postgraduate Medical Education Board (PGMEB) review note reported by ThePrint in June. The board had recommended reconsidering automatic rotation and allowing appointments to be guided by merit and seniority, while giving institutions some discretion.
An RTI reply dated 16 September shows that the NMC withheld the PGMEB’s note on stakeholder feedback, citing Section 8(1)(i) of the Right to Information Act. The application, filed by Dattatri, had sought details of consultations on proposed rotation of HoDs. The NMC said the proposal was still under consideration.
Opponents of compulsory rotation have argued that fixed tenures could disrupt ongoing research and academic programmes, create administrative friction and prevent colleges from choosing department heads according to their needs. Supporters say rotation could widen leadership opportunities and prevent administrative authority from remaining with the same individuals for decades.
Debate over tenure & implementation
According to Dr Amarinder Singh Malhi, president of the Faculty Association of AIIMS (FAIMS) and a faculty member in the department of radiodiagnosis and interventional radiology at AIIMS New Delhi, a three-year tenure would strike a better balance between continuity and opportunities for other faculty members.
“The proposed three-year tenure for rotational headship is the most balanced and practical approach for India’s medical institutions. Five years is simply too long for a rotational system intended to ensure fairness, transparency and equal opportunities,” he said.
He further argued that a five-year term could delay opportunities for other eligible faculty members, particularly in institutions where recruitment and promotions take place regularly. HoD position can also be an important step towards senior academic and administrative roles, including dean, director and vice-chancellor, he added. “If the same individual continues as HOD for five years at a time, the leadership pipeline becomes narrower, opportunities are delayed, and institutional renewal is restricted. In practical terms, five-year rotation risks becoming rotation in name rather than in spirit.”
Citing findings of the V.K. Paul Committee, Malhi said 78 percent of faculty members at AIIMS New Delhi and Postgraduate Institute of Medical Education and Research (PGIMER), Chandigarh supported rotational headship. Support was reported across faculty ranks, including 95 percent of assistant professors, 89 percent of additional professors, 82 percent of professors and 78 percent of associate professors.
He said the committee had examined rotational headship at AIIMS New Delhi, PGIMER Chandigarh, and other AIIMS institutions. Despite the report being submitted on 13 April, 2023, rotational headship remained unimplemented at AIIMS New Delhi and PGIMER, with a collegium system introduced as an interim arrangement for one year, he added.
“The Ministry of Health and Family Welfare must now take a clear, time-bound decision and ensure implementation rather than allow the matter to remain pending indefinitely,” Malhi told ThePrint.
He called for a three-year rotational framework with clear eligibility criteria, selection based on merit and seniority, accountability and a fair transition process. The aim, he said, should be to distribute leadership opportunities without disrupting academic work.
The proposal is also linked to a legal dispute over Karnataka’s policy of rotating HoDs every three years. The Supreme Court stayed the state policy in April 2024. The case raised questions about the distinction between administrative appointments and academic leadership, as well as the extent of NMC’s authority over such decisions.
The NMC’s revised five-year proposal remains under consideration, with no formal notification issued so far.
(Edited by Mannat Chugh)