Faculty or Infrastructure

Nagaland’s investment in the Nagaland Institute of Medical Sciences and Research (NIMSR) represents a major public commitment to healthcare infrastructure. Hundreds of crores of rupees have been poured into creating the State’s first medical college, raising legitimate expectations that it would emerge as a centre of excellence capable of producing competent doctors and strengthening the State’s fragile healthcare system. Yet the revelations made by the Nagaland In-Service Doctors Association (NIDA) raise an uncomfortable and fundamental question: what is the value of expensive infrastructure if the institution does not have the human and administrative architecture necessary to make it function? NIDA’s allegations, if substantiated, expose a disturbing imbalance between investment in buildings and equipment and investment in academic capacity. NIDA claims that NIMSR has been running its MBBS programme without a single faculty member in Paediatrics and with only one faculty member in departments such as Pharmacology. This is not a minor administrative deficiency. A medical college without adequate teachers strikes at the very foundation of medical education and could potentially place the institution’s recognition at risk. Even more troubling is NIDA’s claim that the faculty shortage has persisted for more than a year while academic semesters continue. The reported faculty exodus makes the situation still more serious. Losing experienced teachers while failing to attract replacements can create a vicious cycle: weaker academic environments lead to further attrition, which in turn compromises teaching and eventually the reputation of the institution. NIDA has also questioned the concentration of administrative authority in a single Director-cum-Dean. Its demand for separate positions of Director, Dean (Academics), Deputy Directors for Administration and Finance, Registrar and Medical Superintendent is not simply about creating more posts. It is fundamentally about checks and balances. A public medical institution handling large sums of government money and the education of future doctors cannot depend excessively on one office. The allegation that NIMSR has sometimes invoked its status as a “Society” to bypass established government procedures deserves equally serious scrutiny. If the Directorate of Health and Family Welfare becomes relevant only when the institute faces legal difficulties, NMC notices or requires government funding, the State risks creating an institution that enjoys autonomy when convenient but seeks government intervention when problems arise. Equally important is the alleged suppression of student representation. Medical students are not merely fee-paying recipients of education; they are future doctors whose training environment directly affects the quality of healthcare they will provide. NIDA’s seven-point prescription therefore deserves serious consideration, particularly immediate faculty recruitment under TEQ 2025, separation of the Director and Dean, strengthening of the administrative team, greater involvement of medical experts, proper government oversight and eventually a separate Directorate of Medical Education. The alleged irregularities involving pay scales, NPA and appointments without advertisements also warrant an independent examination. But investigation should not become an excuse for delaying the immediate task of stabilising the medical college. Nagaland cannot afford a showcase medical college with inadequate teachers behind impressive buildings. Infrastructure is necessary, but it is only the skeleton of a medical institution. Faculty, academic leadership, accountable administration, student participation and professional integrity are its living organs. The government must therefore treat NIDA’s concerns not as an institutional confrontation but as a warning. The real measure of the hundreds of crores invested in NIMSR will not be the size of its buildings, but the quality of doctors it produces. If the State fails to protect that investment now, the financial cost will be substantial-but the cost to students, patients and Nagaland’s healthcare future could be far greater.