Impact of UGC Regulation exempting NET for MPhil holders

University Grants Commission (UGC) amended the UGC Regulation, for the third time in 2009 which said that NET (National Eligibility Test) or SLET (State Level Eligibility Test) shall remain the minimum eligibility condition required for recruitment and appointment of lecturers in universities, colleges or institutions. The UGC regulation of 2009 actually talks about the minimum qualifications required for the appointment and career advancement of teachers in universities and institutions affiliated to it. 

The candidates, who have already been awarded the PhD Degree in compliance with the UGC Regulation 2009, will be exempted from the requirement of the minimum eligibility condition of NET or SLET for recruitment for the post of an Assistant Professor. 

The exemption of these candidates has sparked a huge debate on the impact of the decision on the academic community. It also resulted in litigations in High Courts. 

The debate began since the regulation exempted the candidates having obtained MPhil degree on or before July 10, 2009 and also those candidates who had registered themselves for PhD degree on or before July 10, 2009 or have been subsequently awarded the PhD degree. 

Many academicians are of the view that exempting these candidates will pave way for a back-door entry, thereby affecting the quality of higher education. On the other hand, a section believes that it will help the education industry which is currently facing an acute shortage of faculty. Also it will save candidates significant time who have completed their MPhil and PhD, and now want to get into the teaching profession but are waiting to clear the NET or SLET examination. 

According to experts, the higher education sector is currently facing a massive shortage of faculty amongst all courses. It is estimated that the shortage of faculty in institutions like IITs, IIMs, IIITs and central universities has gone up to 30 per cent. Above all, some of the new IITs and other institutions and universities are reported to be facing an acute shortage of faculty which is as high as 70 per cent. 

In technical and professional education, where the private sector is significantly involved, the shortage is almost 50 per cent; however, with the help of visiting and professional faculty, it comparatively appears less. 

According to the Sam Pitroda Report there are already over 1,500 universities in the country, and there are plans to set up another 14 innovation universities, but with such shortage of faculty in the existing institutions, it is hard to imagine how the new universities will cope. 

Prof S K Khanna, former vice chairman of UGC, said, “The question is whether allowing a candidate with MPhil degree being eligible for teaching position and exempting him for NET can help reduce the existing shortage of faculty. In my opinion, gradually, we have to learn to respect our own universities and their degrees. The basic question is why do we need to test someone who already possesses an MPhil or PhD degree? We only do this because we still do not trust our universities.” 

Prof Khanna further said, “Instead of holding such tests, we should monitor our universities through peer groups and accreditation for their programmes and make them better in their education pursuit so that we believe in their quality of post graduates and PhDs. These national tests must be held for relaxation of qualifications, if necessary.” 

There has been widespread sentiment that exempting only those who have qualified before July 2009 is unfair. Ila Joshi, a JNU (Jawaharlal Nehru University) student who recently submitted her MPhil paper in International Relations, said, “If they are exempting students, then as per a general opinion, they should exempt everyone. This exemption is not good as you do not know the quality of other universities who are awarding MPhil degrees to students. This will lead to a dilution in the quality of higher education.” 

Since the UGC regulation has come into effect, several litigations have been filed against it in different courts. One of the litigations filed in Madras High Court is challenging the UGC’s order. The union HRD Ministry has also said that the UGC’s decision was ‘inappropriate’ and ‘unacceptable’. 

Madras High Court, in its judgment passed on December 7, 2010, re-affirmed that a pass in NET or SLET will continue to be the mandatory qualification to apply for the post of an Assistant Professor in colleges. On the other hand, Delhi High Court, while upholding the decision of UGC for appointment of Lecturers and Assistant Professors in colleges, ruled, “The courts should not venture into the academic arena, which is best suited for academicians and experts.” 

When asked if the regulation might pave way for a back-door entry and hamper the quality of education, Prof Khanna said, “I do not agree with this. Earning an MPhil degree is attaining a status; it is a degree awarded by universities and cannot be fake. We must learn to respect and make our universities strong. Back door entry could be through front door as well.” 

There is another section which thinks that the decision of UGC is right as this decision solves many problems of MPhil candidates. According to them, the MPhil candidates obtain their degree after a lot of hard work in universities which requires submission of dissertation and collection of primary and secondary data. Also, according to them, NET or SLET cannot find a merit student only with a single-day long exam. 

Manita Harit, a student who has cleared the NET examination, said, “I do not think that those who have done MPhil or PhD do not have any knowledge. They possess high quality knowledge but are waiting to clear the NET to become a lecturer. It is a welcome move for those, as it will save their time.” 

In its earlier two amendments, UGC said that those who possessed a PhD (up to April 2002) would be eligible for the post of a lecturer, even without the NET qualification. Whereas, on June 14, 2006, it came up with another amendment which said that the NET qualification would be a compulsory requirement, but for those who just have a Post Graduate degree. Candidates with a PhD degree were exempted from the NET requirement for teaching at both Under Graduate and Post Graduate levels, whereas, the MPhil holders were only eligible to take Under Graduate classes. 

Looking at the current scenario of Indian Higher Education, which is facing some acute shortage of faculty, many universities have welcomed this move. The vice chancellor of a central university, who did not wish to be identified, said, “The quality of education totally depends on the university and this regulation will certainly help us in the recruitment of faculty. No university would like to put its name in bad light by recruiting unqualified people. There are several other provisions of UGC which keep an eye on the recruitment process of lecturers in various universities.” 

As per available statistics, there are just 12,500 NET and 15,000 SET certificate holders in the country which makes it difficult to correct the student-teacher ratio in the higher education without undertaking significant steps.  The regulation has been welcomed by many, but leaves some questions unanswered and the prominent one is, what will those students do, who have completed or will complete their PhD or MPhil after July 11, 2009? 

In August 2010, the UGC appointed an ‘Anomaly Committee’ to assess the representation on ‘UGC- Regulations on Minimum Qualifications for Appointment of Teachers and Other Academic Staff in Universities and Colleges and Measures for the Maintenance of Standards in Higher Education, 2010’. 

The committee is yet to submit its report and there is widespread opinion that UGC needs to come up with a full fledged regulation which answers all the questions, improves the quality of higher education, solves the problem of acute shortage of faculty in many institutions and not impact negatively the aspirations of candidates who want to join the noble teaching profession.

 by Abhay Anand


Show More

Related Articles

211 thoughts on “Impact of UGC Regulation exempting NET for MPhil holders”

  1. Our system is totally rotten.Money and muscle rules the day. What is UGC’s Credibility today. They decide for the rich idiots. It is a totally corrupt body

  2. Clearly, lack of proper perspective.If we are serious of NET, why this watering down? Conversely, If MPhil holders are supposed to be eligible for recruitment, why should the NET be introduced in the first instance?The cut of date business has been always creating confusion.We have to get our basics straight.

  3. It is funny to see that NET qualified candidates are given priority to join PhD course and PhD candidates without NET are not qualified as lecturers(!) Why PhD is needed ? In my view M.Phil should be equated with NET and PhD is more than that….

  4. PhD seats should be given to NET qualified persons only. The problem will be solved. Don’t diminish the value of PhD

  5. Those who did their PhD with certain minimum standard are exempted from the NET. Only the sub-standard PhD’s require the test.

  6. i hope the new committee appointed will favour mphil candidates and help our uiversity to overcome the shortage of faculty. moreover, it will releave the candidate from stress and inferior look , being lack of qualification. I hope 2011 will enhance the status of mphil candidate who are looked upon as usless and unwanted.

  7. 2011 will be my major decision year as the decision on exemption of mphil if being unfavouarable will force me to move to corporate sector. if this will be the attitude of many,then the sacrity of lecturer will be a mass, losing confidence and faith on existing universities. Hr minister should not interfear and has no right to take the decison of ones own hard core ability and life.

  8. If someone attempts some MCQs and write the the answers to some cmplicated questions couldnot become the best teacher. Apartfrom that B.Sc. students have nearabout 50% marks. Society expects high staandard NET/SET/Ph.D. to teach them. Is it not controversy? Instead of making controversy between Ph.D. M.Phil. Attension should be given to improve their quality.

  9. I am a registered PhD student (registration date february 2007) and presently persuing PhD in physics. I don’t have NET/SET. I did my PhD course work few months back according to our University rule and planning to submit my thesis. I have a kind request to all the readers. Should I get the exemption from NET for the College/University? Please mention the regulation where from you got the information.

  10. Many of the Universities in India give MPhil based on just a thesis, mostly a review of some topic with practically no original work,findings or theory. Additional coursework for M Phil and PhD is minimal. A good(?) researcher need not always be a good teacher even though quality research can definitely improve teaching capabilities for guidance of projects etc. Hence when lot of corruption is going in the appointment of teachers, particularly in private institutions, these eligibility tests will ensure a minimum quality. If admission to PhD and MPhil programmes are really based on merit, probably, it could have been sufficient. But here, ideal conditions are never ever prevailing and so the tests are essential.

  11. Its very usefull information for all thouse who are active educationalist
    so many Universities in India give MPhil based on just a thesis, mostly a review of some topic with practically no original work,findings or theory. Additional coursework for M Phil and PhD is minimal. A good(?) researcher need not always be a good teacher even though quality research can definitely improve teaching capabilities for guidance of projects etc. Hence when lot of corruption is going in the appointment of teachers, particularly in private institutions, these eligibility tests will ensure a minimum quality. If admission to PhD and MPhil programmes are really based on merit,. In our university eveluation for MPhil is not what universuty/UGC norms stated

  12. While preparing new norms, previous degree holders are to be kept in mind and should not violate their eligibility status during recruitment.

  13. “PhD holders who got it prior to June 2009 and those who are getting it now without complying with norms are not eligible for appointment to teaching post in colleges and universities”. This is what all the regulations and all of the regulators say on date. “Only those holding NET awarded by UGC or CSIR or specific exemption granted on case to case basis prior to appointment by UGC to NET certificate are eligible” (Annexure – I) . None, including UGC, can sanction blanket exemption!

    “UGC Regulation on minimum qualification for appointment of teachers and other academic staff in universities and colleges and measures for the maintenance of standards in higher education 2010” says so and now it has been published in gazette.(30th June 2010 – Annexure A)

    It’s prior “UGC (Minimum qualification required for the appointment and career advancement of teachers in universities and institutions affiliated to it) 3rd amendment, Regulation 2009” also expressed it. The doubts expressed over it all have been clarified by now. (12th June 2009 – Annexure B)

    “UGC (Minimum standards and procedures for awards of M.Phil/Ph.D degree) Regulation 2009” has not been complied by any university or colleges till date (12th June 2009 – Annexure C). Prof Thyagarajan committee set up by UGC also has not identified any college or university conforming to this standard and also has not come out with anything till date as per the latest 474th UGC Committee meeting (6th Jan 2011 – Annexure D)

    The proceeding of the UGC’s 471st (12th August 2010 – Annexure E) meeting granting blanket exemption to M.Phil and Ph.D holders from its own above mentioned regulations and thus attempting to dilute the standard has not been ratified by Ministry of HRD (faxed communication of D.O.No.8.7/2010.U.1(A) to Secretary in charge of UGC (Annexure – F)dated 3rd Nov 2010 ).

    The First Bench of the Madras High Court by it Order dated 6.12.2010 (Annexure – G)has dismissed all petitions challenging the above UGC regulation and has held clearly that both M.Phil holders and Ph.D holders are not eligible for consideration for appointment to the post of Assistant Professors by Teachers’ Recruitment Board of Tamilnadu.

    The First Bench of Delhi High Court by its Order dated 6.12.2010 (Annexure – H) has also dismissed all the petitions challenging the above UGC regulations and has thus upheld the regulation as valid.

    The Supreme Court also has declined grant stay on any of the above mentioned High Court Orders on the Appeal filed as batch of SLPs ( SLP (C) 36023 to 36032 of 2010) till date.

    The Teachers’ Recruitment Board of Tamilnadu has defied all these norms of the regulators and the Orders of the Court of Law and has recruited 836 Assistant Professors for Direct Recruitment Tamilnadu Government Arts and Science Colleges by the result published by it on 17th of February 2011.

    About 500 of the total 836 who have been issued of the appointment orders in the hurriedly organized function on 25th of February 2011 do not possess NET certificate or any specific exemption to it issued by UGC issued prior to appointment. They have done it saying that they are doing it in accordance with the Prospectus issued by them for this recruitment (Annexure – J) that is full of biases for Ph.D and M.Phil. They did not complied with their own Prospectus resulting in Madras High Court intervention by way of an interim Order dated 8th June, 2010 in the Court of Hon’ble Justice V.Ramasubramaniam. Subsequently the First Bench of the Madras High Court also heard a batch of petitions on this matter (Order in Annexure – G) in which the Secretary to Higher Education to Government of Tamilnadu has clearly submitted that all recruiters will be given clear instruction to follow the relevant UGC norms in one of the counter filed by them. It should be noted that none of the recruitments that has happened in any of the colleges and universities in Tamilnadu and Puduchery has followed the relevant norms since 2002 and nothing could be done about it since the results to the recruitment process are always shrouded with cloth of mystery. Only Teachers’ Recruitment Board publishes its result and now the Chairman of this board at the time of Recruitment has been complimented with the position of Commissioner of Right to Information Commission to protect himself.

    So far the teachers to Higher Education get inducted as Guest Lecturers and are then made to pay/ facilitate their way to acquire M.Phil or Ph.D. The State Government here also conducted their own NET exam and issued certificate as SLET certificate to circumvent the regulations for those are in their favor. Though UGC permitted it initially, later after 2006 the UGC has not approved this channel.

    The Prime Minister and Union Minister of HRD are not expected to do anything about this for they are bound by the convenient Coaliation Dharma that is very serious a matter at the time of seat sharing discussion and assembly election.

    The Chief Minister of the Tamilnadu State and the Higher Education Minister of the State of Tamilnadu also have their own political compulsions and so are in favor of TRB blatantly doing such a thing in violation of all the norms and orders.

    The Governor and the Chancellor of all the Universities will not toe in any line tangential to both the Center and State, even if it is nefarious like this.

    The main Opposition in the Parliament is not going to open its mouth on this for their style is only to assume hero’s posture only after an issue has been perceived as a major issue in public domain.

    The main Opposition parties in the State Assembly has also openly identified themselves for the cause of Guest Lecturers seeking regularization (thus demanding perpetuation of money laundering in gaining M.Phil and Ph.D degrees) to reach out to large number of people at the time of election.

    The Left and other Coalition partners are also not interested in according any respect to UGC for they fear that it will jeopardize their relationship with influential and powerful Private Institution Management lobby. Their Leaders form part of the lobby and so they will not.

    The reporters to various media (including The Hindu) here have expressed their limitation on this matter for they say that their management and editorial team are not for publishing the norms to the public. They do not want to educate the student community of the unqualified nature of their teachers and also they do not want to jeopardize the career of about 4 lakh teachers languishing under private management without any qualification as per the UGC norms.

    The Student Federation of India (SFI) and ABVP like bodies only wish that it is better to have teachers who will show grace in awarding marks and so have not voiced anything in this regard.

    Justice Suguna of Madras High Court has mercilessly (My Lord!… You are a fraud!! The TRB office says that you have been fixed for you and couple of other Judges of Madras High Court / MHRD Minister/ and even President of India have recommended for their candidates without the NET qualification) dismissed (and dismissing) all the petitions by ordinary but informed applicants to TRB in her Court arbitrarily and indiscriminately. It is said that she will also be inordinately delaying publishing her orders now in order that Appeals are not immediately possible during the election time.

    Most of the applicants are not aware of the regulations and orders and so have been fooled to believe the Prospectus issued by TRB. They will not do anything for they do not know that they have been deprived of their opportunity.

    Ministry of HRD will not interfere without a Court Order or Public Pressure. Neither are possible on this matter.

    UGC always know that nobody (including the UGC!) give any scant regard to its norms and so will be busy now only in drafting another regulation to send everything again in spin to serve some vested interest.

    Association of University Teachers (AUT) is also not for scrapping the old order of easy M.Phil and facilitated Ph.D and so is keen only on restoring it by all means.

    General Public is not informed properly by media and so there is no possibility of a PIL or any other action from them.

    High Court or Supreme Court is not going to take suo motto notice of things that are sent to it by desperate public as e-mail or letter. They may even threaten them of contempt proceeding.

    Who can take action now? 5th Pillar – Consumer Association of India – Catalyst Trust – Times Now / NDTV etc for impact!!!

    Same or similar things are happening throughout India in all States, Universities and Colleges. Sadly any and all NGOs and Social Organization depend on their relationship with colleges and universities for their survival. It remains to be seen as to who can make a real impact in this case.

    Who can bell the cat of corruption in Academic Recruitment?

    Please Contact Prof. N.Sailapathi (9444885988) for details.

    NGNUF Association
    C/o Dr.R.K.Balasubramanian


  14. M.Phil or Ph.D can be easily obtained from any university in India acc. to my views. As there r so many universities providing this degree simply by taking money and on distance learning criteria. If such people are considered and exempted fron NET/ Slet then it is a injustice to those who really work hard to qualify such national level entrance exams. I feel net/ slet should be the min. criterion for fulfilling the job criteria.the emense enegry the people who had put to make NET/SLET Obligatory if they would have studied a bit they would have cleared one of those, in my personal opinion it should not be relived NET/SET should be and the foremost criteria for educationinst

  15. Dear Sachin Shinde,

    I do agree with your views that M.Phil or Ph.D degrees can be purchased like any other common commodities. In fact! I have seen many students who sit in Delhi preparing for civil service exams, and still pursuing M.Phil or Ph.D from ‘remote’ universities of India. Having said that it will be very unfair to devalue all degrees of M.Phil or Ph.D. There are thousands who honestly works for the above mentioned degrees.

    I think the expert panel in any interview might be knowing the standard of the students. So, instead of debating if NET/SET would be compulsory for lectureship, let every selection board promises not to indulge in favoritism and corruption which is a slow killers of India.

    So, I would like to conclude with the opinion that the recent exemption should be accepted so that those who have already spent lots of time and energy for their M.Phil or Ph.D should be acknowledged. Otherwise, there would be frustration, and the noble profession teaching will loss charms.

    From my experience, I have seen several best teacher who are not NET/SLET. No wonder! Teaching is an art.

  16. We are working in Delhi university and its affiliated colleges. Requesting for getting Net /Set exemption to MPhil holders who completed MPhil successfully before 30 June 2009. UGC or Some universities appointed MPhil holders for the post of Lecturer’s / Librarians before 12 July 2009 on the basis of Mphil and get approval from the university.
    Moreover the job of a librarian is differennt , required a huge practical knowledge and experience of this field. Only Net/SLET holder are less practically known about the subject.so this is my humble rquest to think over the issue positively.

  17. Subject : Gross violation of UGC guidelines in appointments of College cadre Librarians
    Respectfully we submits as under:-
    1. That Govt. of Himachal Pradesh in pursuance of the recommendations of the UGC to the effect that the Librarians will be included in the Scheme for revision of pay scales of teachers had adopted UGC pay scales for college Librarians.Govt.revised the salary scale of Librarians of College cadre wef 01/04/1980 to Rs. 700-1600 UGC, vide notification No. EDN-1(B)-7-6/77-A Vol II dated 29/03/1985.It also laid the essential qualifications for existing and future recruitments to the various posts of Librarians as per annexure’ ‘A’ and ‘B’ of the said notification respectively .
    2. That subsequently Govt. of Himachal Pradesh, Finance Department (Pay Revision Section) vide notification No. Fin B(7)-6/88 dated 19/05/1990, in pursuance of the provisions contained under explanation No.3(h) of the Rule-3 of the H.P. Civil Services (Revised Pay) Rules,1988,revised the pay scales in respect of the Library Staff categories of posts under ‘Chapter’ VI Education. All 36 existing posts of Librarians ( College Cadre) ie.16 Posts of Distt Public librarians + 20 posts of college librarians) were adopted and revised to UGC scale w.e.f 01/01/1986 as under Sr.3 of the above mentioned notification:-Rs. 2200-4000 UGC Entry Scale > Rs. 3000-5000 Senior Scale after 8 years > Rs. 3700-5700 Selection grade after 16 years. This was applicable to the existing librarian incumbents only who came under the ambit of notification dated 19/5/90. UGC scale was to be awarded only to the existing incumbents subject to the conditions of UGC fulfilling the requisite qualifications or was applicable to existing incumbents on acquiring the requisite Qualifications prospectively. (See Note: “The conditions as prescribed in Punjab Govt. Notification No.10/93/88.Ed.I/3977,dated,6-4-1989,revising pay scales of Librarians of University & College Cadre and as adopted in H.P. shall be applicable in the matter of Fixation of pay, placement in Sr. scale/Selection grade, or other purpose as specified therein”.) All conditions have been incorporated in the H.P. Govt. Deptt. of Education Notification.Kha(15)-15/79-Shiksha-ka-1, dated 23/5/90. It also advised to make necessary amendments in the Service Rules as per UGC guidelines. It is also worth to mention that subsequently 45 posts of College Librarians were sanctioned in UGC pay scale of Rs. 8000-13500 in the new colleges opened time to time by the government. Prospective to 19/5/90 all posts of college librarians were supposed to be filled through H.P.P.S.C as specified in the said notification through 100% direct recruitment following UGC adopted guidelines.
    3. That the Himachal Pradesh Government notified the detailed Recruitment & Career Advancement Scheme of College cadre librarians on the Punjab pattern and recommendation of the UGC as specified above vide their notification No. Kha(15)-15/79-Shiksha-ka-1,dated 23/05/90. It also defined the nomenclature of existing “College cadre Librarians” and adoption of UGC guidelines for making future recruitments to the post of College Librarians through “ 100% Direct Recruitment only” through All India selection strictly following UGC guidelines as in case of college teachers.
    4. Subsequently the Govt. of Himachal Pradesh revised the pay of teachers and other Academic staffs in Universities and Colleges including college cadre librarians on revised UGC pattern vide notification no. EDN-A-Chha (7)10/98-loose, dated 07/05/1999 w.e.f. 01/01/1996. Director of Education, H.P endorsed the UGC letter no. F-2-22/96(PS), dated 16/02/99, wherein Deputy Secretary,UGC informed that NET/SET is mandatory for appointment to the post of college librarian/DPE. UGC circular dated 20-2-1990, No.F1-9/1989 (CPP-I) prescribed the Qualifications for making direct recruitment of Librarians. The proposal for Revision of R& P Rules of Librarians (College Cadre) were forwarded by the Director of Education, H.P. to the Government vide no. EDN-H /10A (3)1/90-4, dated 12/7/1999, and further comments submitted vide No. even dated 15/9/99. Due to adoption of UGC pay scale to the Posts of Librarian (College Cadre) at par with equivalent cadres of college teachers the classification of posts were also proposed as class I Gazette to be filled 100% through Direct recruitment. According to the Govt. Classification of Posts notification the posts in the UGC scale of Rs.2200-4000 falls in Class I Gazette category. Further the case was put forth to the Government vide Director of Education letter no. EDN-H (1) A (3)-1/90-4, dated 17/8/2000;20/9/01and 12/6/2002 respectively.. But fate of these proposed revised R&P Rules are not known and remains buried in the files only.
    5. That all the above mentioned pay revision conditions of notifications stands automatically incorporated in the H.P. Technical Services Recruitment and Promotion Rules, 1971 as per provision-11 of the said Rules which reads as follows:-

    Pay Scales: “Members of the services will be entitled to the pay scale as given in Annexure to these Rules subject to their revision by the Government from time to time.”
    6. That the Department unconstitutionally deviated all above pay revision notifications and adopted UGC norms. No direct appointments have been made to the posts of college cadre Librarians since 1988. It continued filling several vacant posts of college cadre librarians by promoting school Assistant Librarians in gross violation to adopted UGC norms and service conditions as per obsolete & defunct existing R&P Rules 1971, initially as class III in state scale by the authorities orders in contravention of the constitutional provisions arbitrarily without any explanation, whatsoever polluting the entire education system of the state. Authorities subsequently also awarded UGC scales to several such promoted Librarians on just acquiring minimum educational qualifications ie. MLISc.(Masters in Library & Information Science) 55% (50% for SC/ST) giving relaxation in NET/SET, and consistently good academic record of UGC norms adopted by the State Education Department, in gross violation of UGC prescribed conditions, vide orders No.EDN-A-Chha(7)-20/98-1,dated 4/8/2006, and No. Even, dated 20/4/2010.and even dt.2/4/11,in the light of the Finance department letter no. Fin B (7)6/88, dated 19/05/90 ignoring UGC conditions as prescribed in Punjab Govt. Notification No.10/93/88.Ed.I/3977,dated,6-4-1989, adopted by H.P. vide notification Kha(15)-15/79-Shiksha-ka-1, dated 23/5/90, thus putting unnecessary burden of lacs of Rupees on the State exchequer. Exemption of these candidates has sparked a huge debate on the impact of the decision on the academic community. Exempting these candidates has paved way for a back-door entry, thereby affecting the quality of higher education. All posts of college librarians prospective to 19/5/90 were to be filled 100% by direct recruitment, strictly following UGC guidelines. Therefore many such ineligible beneficiaries were not left out librarians, since their appointments have been made illegally in arbitrary manner through promotions from the school assistant librarians prospective to 19/5/90 and subsequent pay scale revisions 1996 / 2006 and UGC Regulations 1998 / 2008 /2010 ignoring adopted UGC guidelines. Relaxations have been given without obtaining any approval from the UGC. Your kind attention is invited to H.P. Tribunal, judgment passed on 12/10/04 in MA-1034/04 in OA-1239/2001 titled Chander Lekha and others vrs State of H.P through Secretary Education, and subsequent circular issued by the Principal Secretary (Education) to Govt. of H.P, No. EDN-A-Chha (7)/20/98, dated 11/10/2004 on the subject “Regarding award of UGC scale to Librarians clarification thereoff.’’, to Director of Education clearly say that approval granted to you for awarding left out Librarians with UGC scale ,wide this Department letter No. even dated 25/9/03 & dated 27/12/2003 is applicable only in r/o those librarians who come under the ambit of this Departments notification no.No.Kha (15)-15/79-Shiksha-ka-1, dated 23/05/90, ie. The UGC scale is applicable only to those librarians who have been promoted to the post prior to 23/5/90, w.e.f. date of acquiring the Minimum educational qualification prescribed by the UGC.
    Sir “Such a course violates the mandates of Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution of India as it deprives the ones’ who are eligible for the post, from being considered. A person employed in violation of these provisions is not entitled to any relief including salary,” a Supreme court of India bench of justices P Sathasivam and B S Chauhan passed the judgement while upholding an appeal filed by the Orissa government challenging a state high court order directing payment of revised UGC scales to certain lecturers appointed illegally and not fulfilling the eligibility norms for enhanced salary structure.
    7. That in pursuance of the recommendations of the UGC and Punjab pattern the Govt. of Himachal Pradesh, Higher Education Department revised the scales of pay of teachers and equivalent cadres including library staff w.e.f. 01/01/2006 vide notification No. EDN-A-B (7)-2/2008, dated 15/10/2009.
    8. It is also worth to mention that the Proposal of revised R&P Rules of Librarians as per recommendations of the UGC submitted by Director of Higher Education, H.P. vide No.EDN-H(1)A93)1/90-4(R&P Rules)Lib., dated 12/2 2009 have already been approved by all competent authorities viz. Administrative, Personnel, Finance, Law and finallyH.P.P.S.C has conveyed its approval to the Govt. vide letter No.1-10/71-PSC-part,dated20/01/2010 (College cadre Librarians) class I Gazetted and even dated 15/9/2010.(Public Librarians) State scale. But the Rules have not been Legislated and notified till date for any cogent reasons due to the vested interests of certain people.
    In the above connection it is therefore requested that cases of such ineligible librarians be rescanned for award of UGC scale, further increments/placements in the senior scale/selection grade should not be considered till all such promoted librarians do not fulfill the requisite guidelines as prescribed by the UGC to avoid any future litigations. It is also requested that, the approved R&P Rules of Librarians be notified so that it does not violates the mandates of Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution of India and deprive the ones’ who are eligible for the post, from being considered.

  18. It is a good analysis by Abhay Anand and he brought out the views of Prof.S.K.Khanna former Vice Chairman of UGC regarding MPhil and PhD holders on the appointment and NET/SLET.Monitoring and upholding academic quality is paramount than keeping NET/SLET as a criteria.

  19. Pls tell me, how many time required for cutt of date 30 june 2009 for m.phil holder to excempted from NET/SET?

  20. Hi, Its high time that the government should think about the PhD candidates who have awarded before the implementation of the rule 2009. now our certificates are just good for nothing. The UGC has no right to underestimate the PhD degrees of its own universities. we have done course work in Mphil, our thesis have been evaluated by external examiners, we have followed the entrance system in Mphil and PhD, we have face open viva as prescribed in rule 2009. But still we are not eligible. It has become a mass problem………………it requires a collective endeavor to fight against the Rule.

  21. Hi, Its high time that the government should think about the PhD candidates who have awarded before the implementation of the rule 2009. now our certificates are just good for nothing. The UGC has no right to underestimate the PhD degrees of its own universities. we have done course work in Mphil, our thesis have been evaluated by external examiners, we have followed the entrance system in Mphil and PhD, we have face open viva as prescribed in rule 2009. But still we are not eligible. It has become a mass problem………………it requires a collective endeavor to fight against the Rule.

  22. Govt should come up with the list of institution who were following the time to time guidelines of UGC. Govt should allow the candidates who are holding Ph.D from institutes following UGC guidelines. By doing this govt can check those candidates who have earned their degrees from fake university. Moreover how can govt impose rules retrospectively i.e candidates Ph.D according to UGC regulation 2010 are only eligible while other who have completed their degrees just before this new regulation where should they go? During the time span of 2006-2009 all the candidates having Ph.D degree was exempted from NET and they suddenly change the eligibility criteria in 2009. This is sheer mockery of Ph.Ds granted by their own institutes. Govt is ruining the future of so many talented persons.