Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

11. The crucial qualification issue as to whether a Ph.D holder is entitled to get exemption from passing the NET/SLET/SET for appointment as Assistant Professor is no longer res integra. The Hon'ble Division Bench of this Court in P.Susheela and others v. University Grants Commission represented by its Chairman, New Delhi and another, 2011 (2) CTC 593 has held in paragraph-49 that the NET/SLET should be retained as compulsory requirement for appointment of Lecturers irrespective of the candidates possessing degree in M.Phil or Ph.D, holding further that the Central Government has rightly refused to approve the decision of the University Grants Commission to give relaxation to certain candidates possessing M.Phil or Ph.D from appearing in NET/SLET examination, without considering the object and purpose of raising the standard of education, rather the decision is lawful and based on public interest. The relevant paragraph of the judment of the Division Bench reads as follows:-

?49. In the light of the principles laid down by the Supreme Court, we have no hesitation in holding that the principles of Legitimate Expectation will have no application to the facts and circumstances of the present case. As noticed above, the Government of India, Ministry of Human Resources felt the need to introduce NET as compulsory for the purpose of appointment of teaching post in order to upgrade the standard of teaching. 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.Phiil or Ph.D. 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 University Grants Commission, 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 for appearing in NET/SLET examination. In our view, therefore, the Central Government has rightly refused to approve the decision of the University Grants Commission. Hence, the impugned regulation and the decision of the Central Government cannot, at any stretch of imagination, be held to be illegal, arbitrary or whimsical, rather the decision is rational and based on public interest and also national policy to upgrade the standards of education in the country.?

12. From the above ratio, it could be seen that our High Court has laid down the law that a pass in NET/SLET is a compulsory requirement for appointment of Lecturer/Assistant Professor irrespective of the candidates possessing degree in M.Phil or Ph.D and the exemption granted by the University Grants Commission to the Ph.D holders was held unlawful.

13. Even the Supreme Court, while dealing with the very same issue, in P.Susheela and others v. University Grants Commission and others, (2015) 8 SCC 129, has held as follows:-