Document Fragment View

Matching Fragments

A reply has been filed by the UGC to Writ Petition No.8582/2011, which was adopted in all the cases. It was submitted that the UGC is fully empowered under Section 26 of the University Grants Commission Act, 1956 (hereinafter referred to as the Act of 1956) to frame the Regulations; the UGC considering the recommendations made by the Expert Bodies of the Educationists from time to time, standards of performance varied from University to University, recommendations of Prof.R.C.Mehrotra Committee, has decided to hold a comprehensive National Eligibility Test to determine the eligibility for Lecturer; the UGC has been making amendments in the Regulations from time to time prescribing inter-alia qualifications and eligibility for the post of Lecturer/Assistant Professor etc.; the validity of the Regulations of 1991 and the power of UGC to provide for NET, was upheld by the Apex Court in University of Delhi V/s Raj Singh (1994 Supp.(3) SCC 516); thereafter, the UGC amended the Regulations of 1991 vide Notification dated 21.6.1995; the UGC has again issued Notification on 24.12.1998 providing qualifications and other service conditions; thereafter, the UGC in exercise of the power conferred by Section 26(1)(e) & (g) of the Act of 1956, has framed the University Grants Commission (Minimum Qualifications Required for the Appointment & Career Advancement of Teachers in Universities and Institutions affiliated to it) Regulations, 2000 and subsequently, the Regulations of 2000 were amended by way of University Grants Commission (Minimum Qualifications Required for the Appointment & Career Advancement of Teachers in Universities and Institutions affiliated to it) (1st Amendment) Regulations, 2002 prescribing NET as compulsory requirement for appointment as Lecturer even for candidates having Ph.D. Degree; thereafter, the Ministry of Human Resource Development, Government of India constituted a Committee under the Chairmanship of Dr.B.L.Mungekar to review the National Eligibility Test examination and the interim report of the said Committee was sent by the Government of India to the UGC and considering the recommendations made by the said Expert Committee, the UGC in its 428th meeting held on 11th June, 2006 decided to make second amendment and accordingly, UGC (Minimum Qualifications Required for the Appointment & Career Advancement of Teachers in Universities and Institutions affiliated to it) (2nd Amendment) Regulations, 2006 were framed vide notification dated 14.6.2006; thereafter, the Government of India sent final report of the Mungekar Committee to the UGC and considering the same, the UGC has passed resolutions; the Government of India vide order dated 12.11.2008 under section 20 of the Act of 1956 issued directions and considering the same, report of the Mungekar Committee and other relevant material and aspects, the UGC framed Minimum Standards Regulations of 2009 and 3rd Amendment Regulations of 2009 which came into force on 31.12.2009 and thereafter, Regulations of 2010 were framed by the UGC vide notification dated 30.6.2010 which was published in the Gazette of India on 18th September, 2010. It was further submitted that the candidates seeking appointment to the post of Lecturer/Assistant Professor are required to possess the requisite qualifications as prescribed by the UGC from time to time; the rider put by the UGC in the impugned Regulations cannot in any manner be said to be arbitrary or illegal or ultra vires; laying down of minimum qualifications for appointment to the post of Lecturer/Assistant Professor is a matter which falls within the domain of experts/UGC and no vested right of the petitioners has been taken away by the impugned Regulations; the Regulations have been framed in exercise of powers conferred under section 26 of the Act of 1956 to maintain standards of higher education and they cannot in any manner be regarded as illegal or arbitrary or ultra vires. Hence, no interference is called for and the writ applications deserve to be dismissed.

Before proceeding to consider the rival submissions of the parties, it is necessary to consider the backdrop of facts leading to the framing of 3rd Amendment Regulations of 2009. The UGC has made the NET examination compulsory for appointment to the post of Teachers and Lecturers in the Universities for the first time by framing the Regulations in 1991 and the Regulations of 1991 were framed on the basis of the recommendations of the Expert Committee appointed by the Union of India; Union of India considering the falling standards and disparity of norms with respect to M.Phil/Ph.D., constituted a Review Committee under the chairmanship of Prof.Bhalchandra Mungekar, which held extensive and intensive deliberations through out the country; Academicians, Scientists and Administrators were of the view that floodgates being opened for registration of M.Phil and Ph.D. degrees resulting into further deterioration of qualities of these degrees and consequently, making easy entry of the teaching profession of such degree holders and thus, the Committee recommended that NET should be retained as a compulsory requirement for appointment of Lecturer for both undergraduate and postgraduate level, irrespective of candidate possessing M.Phil. or Ph.D. degree. In view of the recommendations made in the final report of the Mungekar Committee, the Union of India vide order dated 12th November, 2008 issued policy directions in exercise of power conferred under section 20(1) of the Act of 1956. Relevant portion of the policy directions given by the Central Government vide order dated 12.11.2008 are quoted below:-

In this connection, I am desired to convey to you that said resolutions are against the letter and spirit of the regulations issued by UGC from time to time regarding compulsory NET/SLET qualifications for appointment to Lecturers/Asstt.Professors. The above mentioned resolution perhaps does not take into account the fact that appointments, if any, pursuant to the date of coming into force of these regulations are bound to be prospective only. Appointments can never be made with retrospective dates. Therefore, exempting the candidates from NET/SLLT requirement, who are going to be appointed or have been appointed after 11th July, 2009 would be violative of the UGC (Minimum qualifications required for the appointment and Career Advancement of teachers for Universities and institutions affiliated to it) (3rd amendment) Regulations, 2009.

In the case of P.Suseela (supra), the Division Bench of Madras High Court has observed that the Government of India, Ministry of Human Resources felt the need to introduce NET as compulsory for the purpose of teaching post in order to upgrade the standard of teaching and for that purpose, Expert Committees were constituted consisting of eminent experts and academicians, who recommended that NET/SLET should be retained as compulsory requirement for appointment of Lecturers irrespective of the candidates possessing degree in M.Phil or Ph.D. and after considering the report of Prof.Mungekar Committee, the University Grants Commission was directed to frame regulations to serve the national purpose of maintaining standards of higher education, but the UGC, without considering the object and purpose of raising the standard of education and without considering the global scenario, although framed Regulations, but tried to give certain relaxation to the candidates from appearing in NET/SLET examination and therefore, the Central Government has rightly refused to approve the opinion of the UGC and the impugned Regulations and the decision of the Central Government cannot, by any stretch of imagination, be held to be illegal, arbitrary or whimsical, rather the decision was rational and based on public interest and also national policy to upgrade the standards of education in the country.