Document Fragment View

Matching Fragments

26. As far as the prescription of weightage marks are concerned it consists of 5 different heads. The weightage of marks for teaching experience was not seriously under challenge by the petitioners in these writ Petitions. The main challenge was in the award of higher marks for the holders of Ph.D qualification and candidates with Ph.D and M.Phil with SLET or NET. At the outset, we are really surprised to note how a Ph.D candidate with SLET or NET can be awarded a lesser mark of 6 as against the award of 12 marks for mere Ph.D.degree holders. It was vehemently contended by the Learned Counsel for the petitioners and it is also a matter of common knowledge that securing a certificate of NET or SLET after successfully undergoing the said test is an arduous task. The statistics as furnished by the U.G.C. itself in its communication dated 11.10.2006 furnishing the total number of candidates registered for NET who appeared and qualified between December 1989 and December 2005 disclose that as against the total registration of 48,163 in 1989 and 1,35,013 in December 2005, the number of candidates appeared was in the order of 37,131 in December 1989 and 1,09,873 in December 2005. Out of them, those who qualified were 2,343 in December 1989 and a maximum of 8,363 in December 2005. The total percentage of qualified candidates ranged between 2.23 per cent to a maximum of 12.29 per cent. The average percentage was in the order of 5 per cent. Therefore, the above statistics only goes to show that for securing NET or SLET one has to undergo a very rigorous exercise inasmuch as in the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court reported in AIR 1995 SC 336 while referring to Mehrotra Report the Hon'ble Supreme Court has held in para 9 that such test would have the benefit of removing disparities in standards of examination at the Master's level between different Universities. The Hon'ble Supreme Court also acknowledged the Mehrotra Committee's report that by such a step local influence would be minimised and the eligibility zone for recruitment would become wider. However, the Hon'ble Supreme Court also noted that the eligibility test was only to determine the eligibility of the academically qualified person. When such is the accepted recognition for holders of certificate of NET or SLET as approved of by the Hon'ble Supreme Court it runs beyond one's comprehension how Ph.D. with SLET or NET qualification could only be awarded 6 marks while candidates with mere Ph.D. alone can be awarded a higher weightage mark of 12. Therefore, on the face of it such a prescription contained in para 11 of the prospectus is incongruous and therefore, we are not in a position to approve of the same.

30. In fact in the course of the hearing of these writ petitions, the learned Advocate General in his submissions stated that the State Government is also seriously considering the grant of separate weightage marks for holders of Ph.D. or M.Phil with SLET or NET or P.G. with SLET or NET separately.

31. Therefore, on consideration of the above factors and the arguments advanced by the respective counsel for the parties, we are convinced that grant of weightage marks in the matter of selection of a Lecturer cannot be held to be wholly illegal or uncalled for. However, we are not able to approve of the wide gap shown as between the holder of a Ph.D and a candidate with P.G. degree with SLET or NET. We are of the view that though there can be no two opinions that Ph.D. is academically a higher qualification and therefore, there can be a higher weightage marks for holders of Ph.D. when compared with P.G.degree holders even with SLET or NET, but yet the award of such marks as between the above two categories cannot create a high disparity as between those two categories and thereby providing scope for P.G.degree holders likely to be totally eliminated irrespective of holding a NET or SLET by virtue of very high weightage marks being granted to Ph.D. degree holders. 

  Sl.No.   Description of category                Weightage / Marks

         Aided Colleges / Universities /
         Self Financing Colleges in the
         approved post



5        Research Contribution /Books /

In our considered opinion, there should not be a wide gap as between Ph.d. qualified candidate and a P.G. candidate with SLET or NET or M.Phil holder with SLET or NET in the award of weightage marks. We are of the view that even in the event of the State Government going in for the alteration of the weightage marks, such alteration and provision of weightage marks for a P.G. candidate with SLET or NET should harmonize both the channels in the matter of selection and should not result in elimination of one group for the other. Keeping the above perception in mind, when we considered the modification in the award of marks which is stated to be in the anvil, we find that the award of 12 marks to a Ph.D holder as compared to 6 and 5 marks for M.Phil and P.G. candidates with SLET or NET will not get the desired result. In fact, in the statement furnished by the learned Advocate General it was stated that as against 3,108 Ph.D. Degree holders, amongst whom there are 603 candidates with SLET or NET, the P.G. Degree holders with SLET or NET are stated to be 5028 and M.Phil candidates with SLET or NET are stated to be 3,546. Since the total number of posts are stated to be 1000 plus 20, in the interest of justice and in order to ensure that proper distinction is maintained among all the eligible three categories, it will be appropriate that the award of marks for Ph.D.Degree holders on the ground that they are in possession of higher academic qualification should not be doubled but can be marginal as between one category and the other.

Therefore, looked at from any angle, we are convinced that the weightage marks to be awarded to P.G.Degree holders with SLET or NET, M.Phil with SLET or NET and Ph.D. cannot be prescribed with a very wide gap. In that respect even if the proposal of the State Government to provide the weightage marks of 5 for P.G. degree holders with SLET or NET and 6 for M.Phil. candidate with SLET or NET by reducing the weightage marks to the level of 9 for Ph.D degree holders from 12 would meet the ends of justice. To the above we add that the M.Phil holder of pre 31.12.1993 can also be equated with the M.Phil holder with SLET or NET in order to gain the weightage marks of 6 to be prescribed.