Document Fragment View

Matching Fragments

The respondent further submits that as regards the allegation of petitioners in respect of minimum qualification prescribed by the University being contrary to what has been prescribed by the UGC is concerned, Dr.Dev Swaroop, Vice Chancellor submits that for the post of Assistant Professor, the UGC Regulations prescribe good academic record as defined by the University with at least 55% marks (or an equivalent grade in the point scale wherever grading system is followed) at the Masters Degree level in a relevant subject from an Indian University or an equivalent Degree from an accredited foreign University and besides fulfilling the said qualification, the candidate is also supposed to have cleared NET, conducted by the UGC, CSIR, SLET & SET and it is always open for the University to define good academic record and once the UGC has left it open for the University, the action of the respondent-University in defining good academic record u/Ord.141-D(2) cannot be said to be in contravention to the UGC Regulations, 2010 and being in consonance with the Regulations laid down by the UGC, it does not carry any infirmity or error in the decision making process which requires interference of this court and lastly submits that method of short-listing the number of candidates, adopted by respondent-University, being rational and justified based on objective criteria i.e. weightage to academic record avoiding the element of subjectivity, is not open to challenge and submits that percentage of marks obtained by the applicants at different levels, based on their academic excellence, are entered into computer and a list is prepared on that basis alone which removes all kind of biasness on the part of respondent-University. However, from the standard for evaluation of academic record, which has been made available on their website, it is not the case of the petitioners that as per the standard for evaluation of academic record, on the basis of which the procedure for short-listing has been adopted, either of them fall in consideration zone being short-listed for interview in their subjects/departments and that being so, the writ petitions are wholly devoid of merit and deserves rejection.

We have heard the parties appeared in person and with their assistance examined the material made available on record. Before we examine the question raised for our consideration, it will be relevant to take note of the extract of the scheme of UGC Regulations, 2010 notified vide Notification dt.30.06.2010, relevant for the present purpose, reads ad infra:-

4.4.0 ASSISTANT PROFESSOR 4.4.1. Arts, Humanities, Sciences, Social Sciences, Commerce, Education, Languages, Law, Journalism and Mass Communication i. Good academic record as defined by the concerned university with at least 55% marks (or an equivalent grade in a point scale wherever grading system is followed) at the Masters Degree level in a relevant subject from an Indian University, or an equivalent degree from an accredited foreign university.

(ii) NET/SLET/SET shall not be required for such Masters Degree Programmes in disciplines for which NET/SLET/SET accredited test is not conducted.

(2) The minimum requirement of a good academic record, 55% marks (or an equivalent grade in a point scale wherever grading system is followed) at the Masters level and qualifying in the National Eligibility Test (NET), or an accredited test (State/Level Eligibility Test SLET/SET)., shall remain for the appointment of Assistant Professor.

(3) A minimum of 55% marks (or an equivalent grade in a point scale wherever grading system is followed) shall be required at the Masters level for those recruited as teachers at any level from industries and research institutions; and at the entry level of Assistant Professors/Assistant Librarians.

(4) Wherever the University/College/Institution declares results in grade points which is on a scale of seven, the following mechanism shall be applied to ascertain grade and equivalent marks in percentage:

Grade Grade Point Percentage Equivalent O Outstanding 5.50 6.00 75 100 A Very Good 4.50 5.49 65 74 B Good 3.50 4.49 55 64 C Average 2.50 3.49 45 54 D Below Average 1.50 2.49 35 44 E Poor 0.50 1.49 25 34 F Fail 0 0.49 0 24 (5) A relaxation of 5% may be provided at the Graduate and Masters level for the Scheduled Caste/Scheduled Tribe/Differently-abled (Physically and visually differently-abled) categories for the purpose of eligibility and for assessing good academic record during direct recruitment to teaching positions. The eligibility of 55% marks at Masters level (or an equivalent grade in a point scale wherever grading system is followed) and the relaxation of 5% to the categories mentioned above are permissible, based on only the qualifying marks without including any grace mark procedures.