Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

4. Learned Senior Counsel argues that NET/SLET/SET was conducted for the Master's Degree programme in M.Sc Physics, and therefore, he was not eligible to claim exemption from the requirement of 2025:KER:81517 NET/SLET/SET. It is also argued that the M.Tech degree is not in the relevant subject, qualifying for appointment to the post of Assistant Professor in Physics under Regulation 4.4.1 of Ext.P3 UGC Regulations. It is further argued based on the decisions that qualification is to be tested based on the rules and not the advertisement inviting applications, and no appointment can be made in violation of the Rules. It is also argued that the exemption from NET shall be given only to Ph.D degree holders, awarded, in terms of the 2009 Regulations, and the 6 th respondent, not having obtained the same, must be treated as ineligible.

viii.That the 6th respondent had produced Ext.P24 Equivalence Certificate dated 23.12.2015 of the Association of Indian Universities (AIU) after the last date of 17.9.2015 fixed for the receipt of applications and the certificate produced after the last date could not have been entertained.

ix. That, Ext.P24 Equivalence Certificate only stated that the qualification is equated with a Doctor of Philosophy Degree in the corresponding field of an Indian university. "In the corresponding field of an Indian university" cannot mean that it is a certification that the 6th respondent obtained Ph.D. Degree in accordance with the UGC Regulations, 2009 for claiming exemption from the requirement of the minimum eligibility condition of NET/SLET/SET. That, Ext.P24 Equivalence Certificate issued by the AIU is not a certificate issued in the exercise of any statutory power as the said body is not one empowered with any such jurisdiction or competence to issue such certificate especially when Ext.P24 Equivalence Certificate is inconclusive.

14. True, clearing the NET exam or its equivalent is compulsory in addition to the minimum academic qualifications. However, if candidates had been awarded a Ph.D degree under the UGC Regulations, 2009, they need not clear NET/SLET/SET to be eligible for being appointed. Therefore, the exemption is holding a Ph.D degree as per UGC 2009 Regulations. I have already found in the judgment under review that 2025:KER:81517 the Ph.D awarded to the 6th respondent is valid, and reasons have been given for the same. Under such circumstances, the contention that I have not considered the eligibility of the 6th respondent is not correct.