Draft UGC regulation notification: End of the road to thousands of teachers83What a game plan? It’s going on since October 2008. Chadha Committee submitted its report to

UGC for teachers pay revision working in colleges and universities. Readers and lecturers in

colleges and universities were out cast in its recommendations by placing them in pay band III.

Central government employees of the similar cadre were placed in the PB IV. This cadre of

teachers, scientists and researchers was placed in the existing pre-revised pay scale of Rs 12000-

18300 with an annual increment of Rs 420 whereas Central Government employees of Rs 14300-

18300 were drawing an annual increment of Rs 400, less than Readers/L(SG) . While placing central

government employees in pay scale of Rs 37400-67000, no barrier/rider of kind like educational

qualifications or any residency period was placed, emotions of teaching communities were hurt time

and again by putting riders like residency period or higher qualification to exclude them from getting

PB IV. Teachers association submitted several memorandums to UGC and MHRD to place teachers

belonging to Reader/Lecturer (SG) cadre in PB IV without rider of Ph.D. MHRD notification raised

hopes of teachers as MHRD notification removed the rider for this cadre for placement in PB IV. A

rider of 3 years residency period was placed and it was accepted by teaching community without any

resistance. MHRD notification clearly mentioned that Ph.D. qualification will be required only for

appointment as Professor.

The draft regulation report to maintain higher standards in education released recently has belied the

hope of this segment of teaching community by making Ph.D. an essential qualification for promotion

or appointment as Associate Professor. Who is playing this game? It is a known fact that elections

are going to be held very soon for the parliament in India. It appears that someone is playing this

card very cleverly. He wants to ruin the prospects of present government or alliance by creating

hatred among affected teachers towards the present UPA government which is trying to take care of

every section of government employees. Since a large segment of teaching community will get

affected by placing rider of Ph.D., it is unlikely that they will vote in favour of UPA alliance. It is learnt

from reliable sources that an insider is playing this game to settle the old scores with the

contemporary political leaders by playing double game. This game is going to cost heavily to

incumbent government if injustice is done to incumbent Readers/L(SG) by denying them PB-IV on

any pretext. In the first instance it appeared that Apex Committee was trying to reduce the burden on

Government Exchequer by placing riders like residency requirements but now it has become crystal

clear that this is a game plan by few to create dissatisfaction among the intellectuals who not only

counts in great numbers but also have the capabilities to influence a large segment of voters in the

coming elections. This is being done in connivance of both UGC as well as MHRD. Let’s hope that

good sense prevails on the decision makers. This issue relates not only with money and prestige but

to feelings of those who are stagnating in the same cadres for a long time and have to suffer for

whole life. This issue will almost kill their zeal to work and its impact will be clearly visible in near

future. This sort of frustration will not allow them to work and it will be a real burden that will be

evident on educational standards of future generations. These sufferers will stay in the midst of lost

hopes and will cast their shadows on those who will learn hundred of lessons of betrayal from them.

Health benefits & cosmetic uses of almonds

How to show the critical difference (CD)/ least significant difference (LSD) in a Microsoft

Excel Ch

Green Tea: Health benefits, side effects, precautions

Does money plant bring prosperity in our home

Roses: Reflections, commercial cultivation and home gardening

How to make rice beer at home - The Indian Tribal Way

A critical analysis of UGC draft regulation for maintenance of standards , done by Dr B J

Kopper, is reproduced below.

At the very out set it is proved that UGC no longer remains a sovereign caretaker of teachers,

instead and on the contrary it is established beyond doubt that it is the main destroyer of teacher and

his credibility in the society. When the whole world looks up to teacher for its betterment, in India, the

story is going to be for worse. The draft regulations 2009 reveal the utmost abhorrence and

despising mind-set of the parent bodies in UGC and MHRD towards teachers in Colleges and

Universities. At more than one area of regulations UGC has contradicted the MHRD Notification

dated 31-12-2008, that too very drastically. This article is aimed at bringing out the plethora of

anomalies and along with the incredible destructive approach of governing craftsmen. The critique

may run out of alphabets to cover the fiasco and the details.

1. At 2.0.0 the Regulations states interalia as “The pay “fixation formula” developed by UGC

based on the MHRD notification is appended as Appendix-II (to be received from MHRD). This

fixation formula shall be adopted for teachers and equivalent positions in the Library and

Physical Education cadres in Universities and Colleges”.

There is no Appendix II in the regulations and it is stated to be received form MHRD. Now the issue

is attempted to be delayed for further few months.

· Initially Cabinet was unable to sit and concur to issue the pay notifications, after that

· MHRD was boggled over what to issue, and somehow a disfigured Notification was brought out on

31-12-2008 without any fitment formula or tables for the various grades of teachers (may be it was

impossible for them to do that for such recommended positions)

· UGC draft regulation 2009 again is without any fitment formula and fitment tables and states that it

is yet to be received from MHRD.

· This means the pay fixations for teachers have to wait for further period of months till such

“formula” is invented; which seems highly impossible to be in right shape.

· It appears from this that the UGC is either having crooked brains to play spoil sport with the career

and life of teachers or is totally lacking the same (brain).

1. In at 3.0.0 and 3.3.0 the UGC Draft Regulations speak of qualifications and relaxation to PhD

holders for NET.

The UGC is exposing its stature as highly inconsistent for it only brought out the regulations that

M.Phil degree holders are exempt from NET and elsewhere candidates who are M.Phil degree

holders are selected and appointed after 01.01.2006. Some selected candidates are not issued

appointment orders because of this change in stance by the UGC. It remains to be seen as to why

such dilly-dally in the issue. Given its inconsistency it could also after some tine come out with a

statement that M.Phil holders are exempt from NET. Is it not mandatory on the part of UGC being an

institution of such great importance to be stable and think rightly while delivering strict guidelines?

1. The UGC Draft Regulation states at “3.5.0 A relaxation of 5% may be provided, from 55% to

50% of the marks to the Ph.D. degree holders, who have passed their Master’s degree prior to

19th September, 1991”.

Does this mean that those who have passed PG 19-09-1991 are capable as they done PhD degree?

What exactly is relied upon by UGC in stipulating this date? What majot changes have taken in

these 19 years (almost)?

1. At 3.7 & 3.8 UGC states that PhD degree is compulsory for Professor, and in 4.7 it states

that the PhD degree is required for direct recruitment to the post of Associate Professor.

Secondly and in continuation at 6.4.2 it is stated that “Incumbent Readers and Lecturers

(Selection Grade) who have completed 3 years in the current pay scale of Rs.12000-18300 on

1-01-2006 shall be placed in Pay Band of Rs.37400-67000 with AGP Pay of Rs.9000 and shall

be re-designated as Associate Professor on satisfying the API/WP as per Tables I & II through

the PASS methodology stipulated in this guideline through a duly constituted selection

committee as suggested for the direct recruitment of Associate Professor”

UGC Says PhD is compulsory for Professor at 3.7 and again at

3.8 it states PhD shall be a compulsory requirement for all candidates applying for direct

recruitment as Associate Professor,

At 6.4.2 it states that incumbent Readers (PhD degree holders) and Lecturer Selection

Grade (non-PhD) will be re-designated as Associate Professor with due PASS methodology as

stipulated for a Direct Associate Professor.

The third point above is contradictory as PhD would remain a mandatory & compulsory

requirement for direct recruitment as Associate Professor. Whereas the incumbent Lecturer SG

who does not possess PhD also would be made Associate Professor? Or they will not be

made? The regulation here lacks clarity and is contradicting its own statement made at different

stages in the Draft Regulations 2009.It also indirectly means that Lecturer Selection Grade may

not be considered for Associate Professor post even after completing 3 years residency as

mentioned in MHRD Notification. Therefore it becomes binding on the part of UGC to make it

clear whether PhD is a mandatory and compulsory degree qualification for the post of

Associate Professor or not? It appears that such contradictions are the hallmark of UGC.

MHRD in its Notification dated 31-12-2008 had spoken nothing about PhD being compulsory

for Associate Professor and on the contrary has said that those all Readers/Lecturer Selection

Grades who would complete 3years as on 1.01.2006 would be re-designated as Associate

Professor and placed in PB IV, and also that the existing Readers Lecturers (Selection Grade)

as and when complete the residency of three years would be placed in appropriate stage in PB

IV.

If the above regulation is in consultation with MHRD then MHRD needs to reissue another

Notification to incorporate the new (off-track) regulation.

The UGC Draft regulations prescribe the most tough conditions for direct recruitment and as well as

for CAS promotions by adopting to the new procedure of Academic Performance Indicators (API)

and Weightage Points (WP) tables. These tables are appended with the draft regulations. It states at

6.0.0, interalia “The credit points accrued need to be collated with (a) performance of the candidate

in giving a seminar or lecture in a class room situation or group discussion (b) Aptitude and ability for

teaching & research and to plan, analyze and discuss a research problem and (c) capacity to

technology orientation as applicable to teaching and research.

The API as above would involve

Assessment of aptitude for teaching, research and administration

Ability to communicate clearly and effectively.

Ability to plan, analyze and discuss curriculum development, research problems and college

development/administration;

Ability to deliver lecture Programmes to be assessed by requiring the candidate to participate

in a group discussion or exposure to a class room situation by a lecture.

Analysis of the merits and credentials of the candidates on the basis of the Performance

Appraisal Scoring System guidelines developed by the affiliating University based on this

notification.

· Thus UGC has decided to make it a tough call for any to get through the ladder of progress. It is

expecting the teacher to be “perfect” in all fields and then alone would be allowed to succeed

otherwise stay where one is. Weightage Points as shown in the tables in the Appendix III are

unachievable normally by all the teachers. Reasons for which would include remote area where the

Colleges are located, absolute nil chances for research due to academic pressure of the institute,

quality of student force where more onus is on teacher to see that knowledge is drilled into the

brains, stubbornness of the management.

· The compatriot Government servants need not possess any of such criteria as fixed for teachers

and still they would continue to enjoy promotions and placements periodically. Is this not

discrimination and violative of established law of equality?

· The minimum stipulation of API and WP for any promotion for a teacher is stipulated in a manner

that would render him unable to achieve and thus languish in the scale and designation he has

been. For example, if an Assistant Professor AGP 6000 is due for promotion to Assistant Professor

7000 after 4 years as he is a PhD, then he has to earn a minimum of 100 points. In view of his

inability to do so for various reasons he will not be promoted as Assistant Professor 7000. Similarly a

Government Servant enjoys the promotion and he need not have to acquire any points as 6 CPC

has not stipulated any such criteria. Is this not pick choose difficult conditions for a particular group

alone and thus constitute irrational treatment and treating equals as unequal?

1. The API standard and WP stipulated in the draft regulations in summary are as follows:

Teaching : Max 150

Prof. Related Activities (PRA) : Max 50

Research Publications : Max 10/ publication in Referred journals

: Max 05/ publications in jrnls index less than 1

: Max 03/ publications in NR ISBN ISSN Jrnls

: Max 02/ full papers in Seminars

· Books : Max 20 sole & 10/ chapter edited

: Max 10, 05, 05, 03 various categories

· Projects : Max 10, 10,20, 25 based on fund mobilization

· Research Guidance : Max M.Phil 3/candidate,

: Max PhD 10/Candidate.

· Refresher Courses etc., : Max 20, 10, 05, 02 for different categories.

· Conferences etc., : Max 15, 10, 05, 02 for different categories

· Awards/honours/recognitions : Max 50, 25, 10, 05 for different statuses

· Ext, Co curr, Student Ment Ac : Max 200.

1. Now take a look at the minimum a teacher is supposed to possess for placements at

different levels, though the same criteria as has already been stated is missing for compatriot

government servants covered under 6 CPC.

AP 6000 to AP 7000( 4/5/6 yrs) : Min 100 + 1 Orientation Course & 1 Refresher Course

AP 7000 to AP 8000(5 yrs) : Min 200 (100 in relevant 5 years) + 2 RC

AP 8000 to As.P 9000 (3 yrs) : Min 300 (100 in relevant 3 years) +PhD+2 Work Shops

AsP9000 to Prof : Min 400 (100 in relevant 3 years) + PhD + 2 Progs.

Prof to P 12000 : Min 600 (100 from Publications) + awards, honours etc.,

Please peruse the points below:

The scheme as such developed is very exhaustive and fool proof to see that teacher never

has any chance to think about anything other than planning how to acquire these points for

accessing the progress in the form of placement to higher Grade which gives so less benefits.

This is claimed to attract young talents to teaching, in fact on the contrary this dissuades

them to stay away form the profession dreaded with so many difficulties. Therefore, anybody’s

guess is that UGC has perfectly designed kill higher education in India. Let alone attracting the

young talents, this design shall drive away the already present young talents who can switch

over to private sector.

When there exist no such barriers for Government Servants covered under 6 CPC, why

specially design these criteria for teachers alone? The very objective of assured progression is

defeated with these hurdles for a teacher who is primarily required to teaching. In this

hypocritical design, the teacher is made to immerse himself in acquiring the points and satisfy

the authorities in Principal, Management etc, and thus the “teaching suffers”. It appears

therefore that the bureaucratic designees of this have a purpose to kill higher education. Such

foolhardy criteria invite business for academics. Remember what happened with M.Phil & PhD

degrees given importance in sanction of advance increments and other incentives. Internet is

abuzz with news that at various places ineligible persons have been illegally sanctioned

inadmissible advance increments amounting to wastage of public money. The bottom line is

that the teacher is destroyed and UGC wants them to be bureaucratic in function and style.

Moreover, these so called points are to be accorded by the authorities in Principal, Head of

Departments & Management etc., with whom these are potential weapons against the

righteous teachers who are not sycophants. Such scenario will generate divisions and bickering

among teachers and spoil the “knowledge base” atmosphere in Colleges and Universities.

Now coming to the Table III of Appendix III. This describes the Academic Percentage Weightage

table for direct requirement & CAS promotions of teachers in university departments and colleges to

be worked out based on “pass methodology” specified in tables I and II.

This is another nail in the coffin for teachers expecting and desirous of progress for

placements.

Finally, to speak about the entire UGC Draft Regulations, it is found violating the MHRD Notification

dated 31-12-2008.

Suo motu UGC has made drastic, not permitted changes to MHRD Notification by stipulating

PhD degree as a mandatory one for Associate Professor while MHRD said it is not.

The points 2 (a) (vii – xi) of MHRD Notification 31-12-2008 are contradicted by UGC

Regulations at 3.8, 4.3 and 6.4.3, when such power to cross MHRD is not bestowed with UGC.

This is not only violation but also has resulted in disfiguring the MHRD directive.

It is very fitting to reflect the anomalies that were part of MHRD Notification dated 31-12-2008 which

have been further distorted by UGC Regulations (albeit self draft).The MHRD Notification outlays the

details of Pay Bands and promotional avenues and other minutiae, it also is evident in hosting

anomalies, and unjustified regulations leading to further anomalies. It is also but true that the

Notification lacks certain specific details about the pay revision and other requirements which have

opened up further cluster of anomalies. Therefore, the present communiqué is submitted to you to

accept, and understand the anomalies to issue appropriate regulatory instructions for their removal

with proper replacements.

REGULATION 1

1. Designations of posts:

There have been re-designations of various posts held by teachers.

1. Assistant Professor AGP 6000

2. Assistant Professor AGP 7000

3. Assistant Professor AGP 8000

4. ASSOCIATE PROFESSOR AGP 9000

5. Professor AGP10000, 12000

ANOMALIES:

It is requested here by to make it known to community of teachers as to

a. Whether the post of ASSOCIATE Professor of MHRD Notification is same as that of earlier

Associate Professor which is equivalent to Readers?

b. If so Assistant Professor AGP 8000 is an additional step teachers have to pass through to

become Associate Professor?

c. The Already existing Readers and Lecturer Selection Grade are to be treated as Assistant

Professor AGP 8000 or Associate Professor Equivalent to Readers/Lecturer SG?

d. What Pay Band will be applicable to already existing Associate Professors in various Universities

and Institutions? If they are equivalent to Readers then Readers in other institutions and Universities

shall also be eligible for PBIV or not?

e. The MHRD/UGC is hereby requested to state clearly regarding the fate of Readers appointed in

2007 to till date. What will happen if their University advertises the post of associate professor before

their waiting period of three years is over? Will they have to appear in selection committee and get

selected to protect their seniority?

REGULATION 2

1. Pay Band allocation:

1. PB III to Assistant Professor 6000, 7000, 8000

2. PB IV to Associate Professor 9000

ANOMALY:

1. If existing Principals of College in pay scale 12000-420-18300 are eligible for PB IV with

AGP 10000 + Special allowance 2000, then why Readers and Lecturer Selection Grade also in

the same Pay Scale 12000-420-18300 are kept in PB III as Asst. Professor AGP 8000?

2. If the Principals in the same pay scale as mentioned above are directly placed in PB IV what

is the justification of stipulating the rider of 3 years for AP 8000?

3. What will be the fixation of a directly recruited Associate Professor of JNU with less than 3

year experience? I think according to clause 2(a) VIII of the MHRD Notification, he/she will go

to PB-IV, whereas a similarly placed directly recruited DU Reader will be in PB-III. Evidently,

qualification and pre-revised pay scale (12000-420-18300) for a directly recruited JNU

associate professor and a directly recruited DU reader are same.

4. A Reader is senior to Lecturer (SG) as per existing rules. In fact, a selection committee is

required for promotion from Lecturer (Selection Grade) to Reader. Now a Lecturer (SG) from

July 2002 will be Associate Professor from 1.1.2006 and a July 2004 Reader who was never

Lecturer (SG) will become Associate Professor only in July 2007 thereby becoming Junior. Is

this not violative of set norms of seniority as per Service Jurisprudence?

5. At (x) in the MHRD Notification dated 31-12-2008 it is stated that “(x) Incumbent Readers

and Lecturers (Selection Grade) who had not completed three years in the pay scale of Rs.

12000-18300 on 1.1.2006 shall be placed at the appropriate stage in the Pay Band of Rs.

15600-39100 with AGP of Rs. 8000 till they complete 3 years of service in the grade of Lecturer

(Selection Grade)/Reader, and thereafter shall be placed in the higher Pay Band of Rs.37400-

67000 and accordingly re-designated as Associate Professor.

In continuation to his it is again stated in (xii) of the Notification that (xii) Assistant Professors

completing 3 years of teaching in the AGP of Rs. 8000 shall be eligible, subject to other conditions

that may be prescribed by the UGC and the university, to move to the Pay Band of Rs. 37400-67000

with AGP of Rs. 9000 and to be designated as Associate Professor.

Does it then mean that A Reader / Lecturer Selection Grade who have not completed three years as

on 01.01.2006 are to be re-designated as Associate Professor after they complete three years and

would be subjected to other conditions which are going to be prescribed by UGC, i.e., selection

committee or interview?

1. Though the MHRD Notification dated 31/12/2008 states that the pay fixation will be as per

the 6 CPC, it has failed to see that there exists no fitment table for 12000-420-18300 in 6 CPC

and therefore many redundant variants are being used by different setups elsewhere in India.

This anomalous condition reflects the callous attitude of the department concerned about the

higher education.

1. The Pay Fixation as per 6 CPC for PGT of Kendriya Vidyalaya who are also in PB III, they

are upgrading the scale, and then mapping to corresponding pay band and adding grade pay. If

similar such procedure is not adopted for Assistant Professor in PB-III then Assistant

Professors will get salary than PGT of Kendriya Vidyalaya. This is another anomaly that MHRD

has to set right by instructive regulation for Assistant Professors in Colleges and Universities.

Suggestion:

1. Therefore in scrutiny of the above evident anomalies it is appropriate, accurate and strongly

demanded to recommend PB IV to all Readers and Lecturer Selection Grade from 01/01/2006,

without any riders with appropriate pay fixation in the stages referring to fitment tables to be

given.

2. Issue proper guidelines for scale up-gradation and mapping to appropriate pay for Assistant

Professors as has been dealt with for the PGT of Kendriya Vidyalaya.

Entry Level High Profile Jobs in India: 1. Probationary Officer (PO) in a Bank

This article provides complete information on job profile, pay scales, eligibility, methods for

preparation and other information related to probationary officers post in banking sector.

Information about written examination and preparation for the group discussion and interview

etc. is provided. - 18 months ago

UGC pay package (6th pay): fitment tables for teaching & associated cadres

The pay of incumbant teachers placed in different categories, librarians, assist. and deputy

librarians, assist. and deputy registrars, registrars, group A staff belonging to various cadres of

physical education and examination sections, shall be... - 2 years ago

Revised pay scales of CSIR Scientists in India

Revised Pay Scales for CSIR Scientists The existing scales and revised scales after 6CPC are

shown below in the table. The other conditions are as follows: 1. All the Scientists in Pay Band-

3 with Grade Pay of RS.6600 ,Rs. 7600 and Pay... - 2 years ago

Pay Revision for IIT, IIM, NIT, IIS faculty- Issues & options

Pay Committee (Govardhan Mehta Committee) was constituted by MHRD vide notification no.

9-4/2007=TS.I, dated 29-8-08/2-09-08 to consider the revision of pay of the faculty and

Scientific/Design staff of the Central Technical Institutes which... - 2 years ago

ICAR Scientists Revised Pay Scales in India

Since scales for ICAR Scientists are adaptions from UGC scales for teachers, great similarities

exists between ICAR and UGC scales except few differences in terminology. ''Assistant

Professor" is "Scientist", Associate professor as per UGC scales is... - 2 years ago

Draft UGC regulation notification: End of the road to thousands of teachers

What a game plan? It’s going on since October 2008. Chadha Committee submitted its report

to UGC for teachers pay revision working in colleges and universities. Readers and lecturers in

colleges and universities were out cast in its... - 2 years ago

Jhumari Tilaiya Sainik School Photographs

Have you ever heard of Jhumari Tilaiya? If you have interest in music the answer should be

yes. I have a curiosity about Jhumari Tilaiya since I heard this name in my childhood while

listening programs based on songs tuned in "All India Radio".... - 3 years ago

Teachers' 6th Pay Revision in India - Associate Professor's Pay Fixation Issue still looming

large

This hub was published just after the submission the Chaddha Committee's report. Issues of

immediate interests were then the injustice done to teachers working for a long time in the pay

scale of Rs 12000-18300. Committee proposed these teachers to... - 3 years ago

REGULATION 3

a. It is stated interalia in the MHRD Notification dated 31/12/2008 at (iii) The pay of teachers and

equivalent positions in Universities and Colleges shall be fixed according to their designations in two

pay bands of Rs. 15600-39100 and Rs. 37400-67000 with appropriate “Academic Grade Pay” (AGP

in short). Each Pay Band shall have different stages of Academic Grade Pay which shall ensure that

teachers and other equivalent cadres covered under this Scheme, subject to other conditions of

eligibility being satisfied; have multiple opportunities for upward movement during their career”. The

AGPs as stipulated need a thorough re-look and redesigning in the light of the AGPs of Asst

Professors/ Lecturers in the pre- revised scale of 8000-275-13500, vis-à-vis the GP of PGT Grade I

and School Vice –Principal who were at par with one another in the pre-revise scale of pay Now the

latter are placed in PB 3 with GP 6600, whereas the MHRD has stipulated a lower AGP for the same

grade in 6000. Similarly, As per the pre revised scale Senior Lecturer and School Principals were at

par (in the scale of 10000-325-15200). Now Senior Lecturer is placed with AGP 7000 whereas

School Principals would draw salary with GP 7600. This is a clear case of discrimination and also

violation of Article 14.

1. Suggestion:

1. Therefore, to absolve the above evident anomaly, the Assistant Professors with PB III may

be provided equivalent AGP of 6600 & 7600, which is not only justified but also an act of equal

treatment to equals.

REGULATION 4

1. Posts of professors in UG/PG Colleges:

1. It is stated vide (xiii) Ten percent of the number of sanctioned posts of Associate Professor in

an Under Graduate College shall be that of Professors and shall be subject to the same

criterion for selection/ appointment as that of Professors in Universities, provided that there

shall not be more than one post of Professor in each Department; and provided further that

One-fourth (25%) of the posts of Professor in UG Colleges shall be directly recruited or filled on

deputation by eligible teachers and the remaining three-fourths (75%) of posts of Professors

shall be filled by merit promotion from among eligible Associate Professors of the relevant

department of the Under Graduate College.

2. And again under (xix) There shall be one post of Professor in each Department of a Post

Graduate College and shall be subject to the same criterion for selection/ appointment as that

of Professors in Universities, provided that One-fourth (25%) of the posts of Professor shall be

filled on deputation/direct recruitment from among eligible teachers and the remaining three-

fourths (75%) of posts shall be filled through merit promotion from among the eligible Associate

Professors in the relevant department of the Post Graduate College.

3. Up to 10% of the posts of Professors in universities shall be in the higher Academic Grade

Pay of Rs. 12000 with eligibility conditions to be prescribed by the UGC.

Anomaly:

1. There are UG Colleges spread widely in India where the posts of Associate Professors either

or not sanctioned or do not exist at all. In such event the Lecturers/Assistant Professors who

reach to Associate Professor 9000 pay are deprived of chances to become Professors.

Thereby Equals are treated as unequal and hence a clear-cut anomaly in concern to Article 14

of Constitution of India.

2. Even in the PG Colleges stipulation of only One Post of Professor per Department takes

away the chance from those who are equally qualified and eligible for Professorship but are

denied because of this regulation at (xix) which is short of focus and reflects bias.

3. By no means 10% Professors can be screened out to be superior over the others who

complete 10 years as Professors in universities. This is in view of the virtual truth that, barely a

few, almost all are devoted to experienced deliberations/lectures, research guidance as internal

and external supervisors, members of various high level committees for actually contributing to

all developmental matters of the university in academics/ research/ policy making and face

lifting in national and international delegations for duly elevating the scholastic status of Indian

Nation. To doubt their credibility and integrity is appalling and painful (on the basis of just a few

relatively slow workers, if any, owing to health ground).

Suggestion:

1. Instead of 10% law in UG Colleges and One post per Department in PG Colleges it may be

treated in the same lines with the treatment given to Universities. This also will enable many

aspirants at College level to enter University stream.

2. The graciousness, thus, on part of the Govt. is to allow the AGP of 12000 to all Professors in

universities as and when they complete 10 years, because many of them will be

superannuating (or having only a few years of service left) by the time they complete 10 years.

This will (i) stop pick and choose on religion/ caste/ political/ local grounds which is a hard truth

we must accept and (ii) relieve the administration, how-so-ever honest and meticulous it may

be, of many of the worries (as to whether leave the selection process or get a bad name after

conflict decisions). Thanks if the concerned authorities can accept these humble unbiased

suggestions from the academic fraternity.

Regulation 5:

1. National Eligibility Test (NET) shall be compulsory for appointment at the entry level of

Assistant Professor, subject to the exemptions to the degree of Ph.D.

Discrimination and Anomaly:

1. There are already many persons serving or aspiring to serve as teachers who have acquired

MPhil degree based on UGC notification dated 14.06.2006. If MPhil is given no weightage now

then the time, energy, money put in is wasted. The reasons for exiling MPhil from exemption is

not explicitly stated anywhere in the MHRD Notification. This amounts to discouraging the

degree to be pursued. Why UGC is again and again changing its decision on eligibility criterion

for lecturership?

Suggestion:

1. If PhD degree is exempted from NET why not MPhil? Therefore the discrimination needs to

be corrected by exempting MPhil from NET.

Regulation 6:

1. The MHRD has again gone off course in the same manner as it had in implementing the

earlier Scheme 1998 stating what is stated in as “State Governments, taking into consideration

other local conditions, may also decide in their discretion, to introduce scales of pay higher than

those mentioned in this Scheme, and may give effect to the revised bands/ scales of pay from a

date on or after 1.01.2006; however, in such cases, the details of modifications proposed shall

be furnished to the Central Government and Central assistance shall be restricted to the Pay

Bands as approved by the Central Government and not to any higher scale of pay fixed by the

State Government(s)”.

Anomaly:

1. MHRD is very well aware of the decision of the Kerala High Court regarding the anomaly of

implementing the Scheme 1998 from 27/7/1998 instead of 01/01/1996. In spite of such glaring

decision from Kerala High Court, the present Notification is extending the similar anomalous

conditions for the present and future thus inviting many cases of legal redressal through the

High Courts and Supreme Court.

Suggestion:

1. Instead of offering the States to implement the Scheme 2006 from a later date than

01/01/2006, the MHRD needs to direct the States to implement it from 01/01/2006 thereby

avoid the huge number of anomalies that would otherwise arise, and put the entire Higher

Education out of gear. It is reminded again here to keep in the back of mind the decision given

by Kerala High Court in 2002 & 2005 and recently in 2008. The reason of financial implication is

a travesty in view of what is stated and said high about Higher Education. The financial support

of 100% to states is one such act that would nib the buds of anomalies and discriminative

treatments to teachers thus save many of them seeking legal redresses.

REGULATION 6: SUPERANNUATION

1. The MHRD Notification is totally fuzzy about the matter of Superannuation. In the beginning

para it says superannuation age of CentralUniversities and Centrally Funded Institutions and

later on in the next denies enhancement to Librarians and others as they are not engaged in

classroom teaching. Overall it has not cleared the matter of superannuation as to whether it is

present 62 or enhanced to 65.

Anomaly;

1. Since the states are given free hand to decide due to financial reasons, the superannuation

age in different states would be different. This has been one of the main issues to make the

superannuation throughout India, whether in Government, University, and Private & Public

SectorColleges. By not adhering to this principle of equality MHRD has given rise to anomalous

situation. When UGC and MHRD can dictate on pay perks and service conditions why

superannuating is let go to be different. This will rob off the chance for any professional

progress to those who are made to retire early than their counterparts elsewhere.

Suggestion:

1. It is very much needed to make superannuation a uniform feature throughout India; it may be

either present 62 or may be enhanced to 65.

Regulation:

1. That the teachers be paid 40% of the arrears in this financial year 2008-09 and rest 60 % in

the next year.

Anomaly:

1. In absence of clear cut directions and lapses majority of Universities and institutions have not

acted upon the directive. It has been a circular reference to MHRD Notification which contains

no clarity about its own direction.

Suggestion

1. Immediate instruction may kindly be issued to pay some total of amount to teachers pending

final fixation and clearance with UGC Issuing perfect regulations and scheme 2008.

In view of the above, it is therefore requested that the said anomalies in the MHRD Notification dated

31/12/2008 and also the drat UGC Regulations be immediately scrutinized and proper prompt

action in issuing the re-corrected Notification at the earliest and save the hassles of legal redresses.

To restore the faith of teacher in the profession chosen passionately to perform and enhance the

desire to learn more shall not be dwarfed by shortfall of regulations, and it is in this noble intention

that this set of anomalies are brought to your notice for corrective measures at the immediate stroke.

The intention to receive appropriate recognition in both status and payment by teacher shall not be

snubbed by a select few who design such unacceptable recommendations which are not only

discriminative but also insulting to the entire community of teachers. The teachers who are

appointed for teaching should be spending valuable time in teaching and not in Courts to fight over

the injustice, but that does not defeat their spirit to fight for the justice.

VOTE UPVOTE DOWNSHAREPRINTFLAG

Was this Hub ...?

Useful (1)

Funny

Awesome

Beautiful (1)

Interesting

education: Pay Revision for IIT, IIM, NIT, IIS faculty- Issues & options

education: Top Post Graduate Homeopathy Colleges in India

Comments Follow (0)

Malay Ray 3 weeks ago

I awarded MPhill (with Research methodology) and old resulation P.hD degree. I can be bebifited to

P.hD degree in accordance with the U.G.C ( Minimum standard and procedure for award of PhD

degree) Resulation,2009.

nidhi shukla 4 weeks ago

my ph.D is completed in indore DAVV ,year 2008. so i am fulfill the regulation 2009yes/ no.

Navnit Patel 2 months ago

respected sir,

please inform to 2006 lecturer regulation appointment

SHEENA 3 months ago

WE FEEL THAT SUCH NOTIFICATION WILL BE BADLY AFFECTING THE STANDARD OF

TEACHING IN EVERY INSTITUTION AS FACULTIES ARE SUPPOSED TO CONCENTRATE IN

THEIR SELFISH ADVANCEMENT AND ACHIEVEMENT RATHER THAN TEACHING THE

STUDENTS. HOW DO THEY GET TIME TO TEACH THE STUDENTS AS THEY WILL BE BUSY

WITH SEMINARS, PUBLICATIONS AND SO ON.

DR. SUNDER NARAYAN JHA 3 months ago

ugc regulation 3ojune2010 ke under yeh spasht nahee kiya gaya hai ki jiskee niyukti july 2007 ya o1

september 2008 se pahle assistant-professor ke pad par hogee uske liye wetan fix karne ka kya

tareeka hai. kya use chaar noncompounded increement milenge? ya fir five noncompounded. iske

saath yeh bhee awashya batya jaye ki pay fixation fitment table ke anusar hogi ya fir kaun si widhi

apnaayee jayegi? kyonki isse bahut jagah dikkat hai.

C. S. Varma 10 months ago

6th pay revision by U.G.C. is not attractive enough to attract and retain the best of talents in the

profession. Politician-bureaucrat nexus in many states are trying to meddle with the scale, and also

trying to delay its implementation.

v vedanarayanan 11 months ago

I advocate the UGC become Up Graded Center for

UNIVERSITY which makes students good academicians and scientists for dream INDIA 2020..

raghubir29@rediffmail.com 13 months ago

dear sir tell me net is exmpeted for agriculture assisitant professor in soil science yes /no

raipur 14 months ago

at igkv raipur not adopting ugc regulations

Jaspal singh 15 months ago

I am a regular lecturer now and appointed in March 2010 with Ph.D. only without NET. What will be

the future of mine. So Ph.D. MIGHT BE EXEMPTED.

mahender singh 15 months ago

Ph.D. should be exempted from NET prior to 2009

deepak s. bansod 16 months ago

net and ph.D. holders have exemptions why not to the m.phil students? those they are equally

qualified for the post of assistant professor according to ugc third amendment

mekanagaraj 17 months ago

I have gone through the above critical comments written on the draft regulation of UGC. It is time to

have critical comments on the new regulation 2010.

I feel the UGC's new regulation would result in class polarisation(assistant professors and others) in

the academic community and marginalisation of assistant professors(with low salary, prestige, power

but longer duration under the lowest level).

2. It will obstruct the entry of young talented youth in the universities and colleges for teaching.

3. Though there is nothing wrong in expecting teachers to perform, the PBAS with APIs introduced

for recruitment system has no theoretical base, conceptual clarity and empirical correspondence.

The scores and weights assigned are arbitrary and it has not been tested for validity and reliability.

4. The PBAS over empahsises quantity and does not have any indicator of quality of teaching or

research.

5. The UGCs measures for transparency are not adequate. There is mandatory requirment for

publication of all the information concerning recruitment scores and bio date online. There is no way

to know what happened in the interview.

6. Hence the new system will not improve quality. It represents the interests of a few seniors.

for further discussion please visit the following blog

http://perceptionugcnewregulation.blogspot.com/

pasunkilipandian 17 months ago

If a person wanted to become a doctor it is enough if he/she finishes M.B.B.S. No NET or SLET is

required in that case. This the case with many profession What is the need for NET/SLET?

Otherwise abolish M.Sc and M.Phil and conduct NET/SLET.

M.Phil is not a joke and it is a junior research degree because of that only they get two increment.

In those days P.G degree and then M.Phil is the minimum qualification for appoinment

Why they gave exemption from NET is that there are not even a sigle candidate in some subjects

Arup hazarika, Assam 17 months ago

If M Phil degree holders were exempted from clearing NET and SLET only to fill in the vacancies,

then why should they get double benefits of exemption and 2 advance increments at the same time?

Is it not a gross injustice against NET qualified teachers?

pasunkilipandian 17 months ago

The sixth pay commission recommendation for college teachers is aimed to attract young scholars

and students

for doing science and arts and expect them to come for teaching and research by fixing attractive

package for this profession equivalent or more than software profession. But contrary to this UGC

2010 has notified the eligibility condition for appoinment and for CAS (one has to climb seven hills

and seven seas and etc..)as difficult as possible. No one can easily enter into this profession and

also no one will be interested to enter into this job because of poor package Only after two decades

one can get a resonable salary by that time that amount will be (a beggers earnings in half a

month)nothing.The prices of products are changing day by day

So the teaching community should fight against this unitedly. Then only this community will exist and

the teachers association will be there.

Because of the NET and Ph.D became mandatry for entry most of the vacancies will remain vacant

for this reason only they have exempted M.Phil and Ph.D upto 2008

dr sk sharma 17 months ago

ugc by its regulation 2006 gave exemption from N.E.T. to ph.d. holders but now ugc by the

regulation of 2009 is saying that only those ph.d. holders are exempted from N.E.T. who got the

degree through proper way of test. In Rajasthan none of the universities conducted written test for

ph.d. entrance.What does this mean ?

the Ph.d. degrees from 2003 to 2009 are invalid .

If ugc means it than what it was doing since 2003 ? Was she sleeping ? or a very genius person has

come in ugc who know how to maintain high standards of education which earlier foolish ugc

chairman didnot know. is it a joke to change decision in such a foolish manner. Does ugc know how

much people who are working as a lecturer are affected by this decision .UGC's decision has caused

mental harrasment to lakhs of student. Either the chairman at the time of 2006 regulation is guilty or

the present chairman .Now this is upto the civil society and justice system to give punishment to any

one of them

crusador Hub Author 22 months ago

teachers (Reader/Lecturer (SG)) and equivalent non-teaching cadres who have retired prior to

1.1.2006, are eligible to draw pension/family pension in pay band IV (Rs 37400-67000) if they have

completed 3 and 5 years service in pre-revised scales of 12000-420-18300, respectively. State Govt.

has been informed of the decision and teachers in state universities can now draw revised pension if

state govt. agrees to it. This is realy a good news. Congrats.Details are available at: http://indian-

college-teachers.ning.com/profiles/b

maya 22 months ago

What are the 6th pay norms for MCA lecturer already in teaching ?becoz net exam is compulsory at

entry level candidate .

Nayan 22 months ago

Dr Kumar is right when he says all readers/sg lecturers who joined on or after 1.1.2006 be

redesignated as Associate Prof. and placed in PB 4. Whats the latest update???? Any comment?

Dr Kumar's comment for reference:

I trust the best way to resolve this issue is to make all the incumbent readers as on 1.1.2006 be re-

designated as Associate Professor and be place in Pay Band IV with AGP of 9000/- w.e.f 1.1.2006.

Thereafter all the person appointed after or on 1.1.06 be automatically be redesignated as Associate

Professor and will be placed in Pay Band IV from the date of their appointment.

ASSOCIATION OF LECTURERS IN GOVERNMENT COLLEGES (MES.GROUP-B) 2 years ago

ASSOCIATION OF LECTURERS IN GOVERNMENT COLLEGES (MES.GROUP-B)

(Recognized by Government of Maharashtra vide G.R.-RGA-1003/C.N.4/2003/16-A Dt.3.3.03)

(Affiliated to M.S.Federation of Gazetted Officers)

Secretary President

Dr.H.A.Hudda S.S.Andhare

------------------------------------------------------------

Address: Vidyut Nagar, V.M.V.Road, Amravati-444604 E-mail-sureshandhare@rediffmail.com

------------------------------------------------------------

Date: 21.11.2009

TO,

MHRD, UGC AND HIGHER EDUCATION DEPARTMENTS OF ALL STATE GOVT.

Subject-Amendment of Clause XXII of paragraph 7 regarding Incentives for Ph.D/M.Phil.

Reference-

1) Government of Maharashtra Higher & Technical Education Department, Resolution No.NGC

2009/(243/09)-UNI-1, Mantralaya Annex, Mumbai–400032. Date: 12th August 2009.

2) Government of India Department of Higher Education, Ministry of Human Resource Development,

New Delhi. Letter No.1-32/2006-U.II/U.I (i) dated 31.12.2008.

Respected Sir/Madam,

G.R. and Letter at 1 and 2 above variously extended the benefit of advance increments for

possessing Ph.D./M.Phil and other higher qualifications.

Clause XXII of paragraph 7 regarding ‘incentives for Ph.D/M.Phil and other qualifications’ in above

reads as under.

“For posts at the entry level where no such advance increments were admissible for possessing

Ph.D/ M.Phil. under the earlier scheme, the benefits of 5 advance increments for possessing Ph.D./

M.Phil. shall be available to only those appointments which have been made on or after the coming

into force of this Scheme.”

The above clause is unjust, insufficient and ambiguous in the light of following. Persons on any post

other than Assistant Professor who acquired Ph.D./M.Phil degree either before entry in service, or

during service, are appointed either by nomination or promotion with due permission of UGC, on the

post of Assistant Professor and the benefit of protection of pay is extended to them as per rules of

State. But consequent upon protection in pay, no benefit of 5/2 advance increments for Ph.D/M.Phil.

is accorded to them on the assumption that they are not freshers and therefore their pay is not fixed

on lowest (initial) pay in the pay scale meant for the post due to limited coverage (shortfall) of

clauses I and II of para-7 of G.R./Letter cited in reference.

Similarly they are not entitled for 3/1 advance increments as per clauses IV and VIII, as

Ph.D/M.Phil.degrees are not acquired during their service career as Assistant Professor.

Though the clause XXII a little bit covers the interests of said class of persons, but it leaves so many

things unexplained therefore it appears to be unjust, insufficient and ambiguous. In order to cover

the said class of persons undoubtedly under the umbrella of clause XXII it is requested to amend the

clause XXII to give it the following shape and sense.

“For persons holding any post in previous (past) service cadre where the provision of award of

advance increment for possessing Ph.D/M.Phil.was not available either at entry level or in-service

career, under any earlier scheme i.e. Pay Commission, the benefit of 5/2 advance increments for

possessing Ph.D/M.Phil respectively, shall be available to only those appointments either by

nomination or promotion which have been made on or after the coming into force of this scheme.”

If the clause XXII is amended to this effect as mentioned above, it would benefit all the concerned

persons including the members of this Association who have been promoted from junior college

lecturer to Assistant Professor after 01.01.2006.Further it would be crystal clear leaving no room for

doubt in future.

Thanks.

Amravati Yours faithfully

Date-21.11.2009

(S.S.Andhare)

Sanjay Kumar, Patiala 2 years ago

Mandamus is a writ directed to a person, officer, corporation or inferior court

commanding the performance of a particular duty, which results from the official

station of the one to whom it is directed or from operation of law3.

The order of mandamus is of a most extensive remedial nature, and is in

form, a command issuing from the High Court of Justice, directed to any person,

corporation or inferior tribunal, requiring him or them to do some particular

thing therein specified which appertains to his or their office and is in nature of a

public duty. Its purpose is to supply defects of justice; where there is a specific

legal right and no specific legal remedy in cases for enforcing such right and it

may issue in cases where although there is an alternative remedy, yet such mode

of redress is less convenient, beneficial and effective.

Mohammad Farooque Khan 2 years ago

I wish to know the qualifications required for the post of Lecturer in the facuty of Managment science

for MBA cource in university department.

Regards.

DR Sukhbir Singh, Amritsar 2 years ago

One of the most affected lot are the readers who have spent 8 or more years.

They are ignored the most. Their promotions have been stopped by all universities taking the plea

that new guidelines have not come

Solution till new guidelines comes is: Let them apply after 6 years as per the new MHRD

notification . Existing procedure of promotion be followed.

Those already promoted as professors be backdated to the period when they completed 6 years. No

seniority issues involved

Dr Kumar 2 years ago

I trust the best way to resolve this issue is to make all the incumbent readers as on 1.1.2006 be re-

designated as Associate Professor and be place in Pay Band IV with AGP of 9000/- w.e.f 1.1.2006.

Thereafter all the person appointed after or on 1.1.06 be automatically be redesignated as Associate

Professor and will be placed in Pay Band IV from the date of their appointment.

ff 2 years ago

make all lecturers in PB iV with out any conditions

Dr Nitesh Kumar, Chandigarh 2 years ago

What is this discrimination all about

Howe can somebody joining after 1.1.2006 get associate professorship (item 6.4.12) and then

become professor after 3 years. This is technically and legally wrong. On one side in open selection

5 years are required from associate professorship to professorship whereas only 3 years in CAS.

This must have been done to appease some at the expense of thousands of readers who have been

stagnating for 8 years

Why don't some teachers take initiative and talk to MHRD minister. Please use your influence to

impress upon the MHRD/UGC not to do this injustice

Let us join hands against this regulation, particularly clause 6.4.12

Dr Bindu Sharma 2 years ago

Prof Kumar is absolutely right. UGC is creating interpersaonal rifts in universities. Clause 6.4.12 is

indeed damaging. Indded person appointed a sreader after 1.1.2206 will be redesignated as

assocaite professor whereas any redaer prior to 31.12.2005 will take 3 yaers to be redesiganted a

assocaite professor. This is legally untenable. But UGC can do anything. Babus sitting at UGC must

be having certain high and mighty in mind. Irony is that MHRD did not specify this clause. Let all

readers join to figfht against this foolishly drafted clause. How can a person appointed after 1.1.2006

become senior to those appoinbted/promoted prior to 31.12.2005.

DR S.Kumar 2 years ago

Irony regarding new, revised draft guidelines. These appear to have been drafted keeping certain

influential persons in mind. Clause 6.4.12 says existing readers appointed after 1.1.2006 will be

redesignated at associate professors whereas those appointed even a day ealier i.e. 31.12.2005 will

have to spend 3 years to be redesignated as associate professors. Funny are the ways of UGC. This

way a junior will become senior.

DR. V.P. 2 years ago

UGC has to be very careful in not allowing dilution in the qualifications of the teaching faculty. Most

of the influential persons who acquire degrees through Correspondence and Distance Education get

into government and aided institutions. Many of the Lecturers in Arts Faculty have obtained their

postgraduate degrees in cross major subjects and after appointment, teach undergraduate students

the subjects that they haven't studied. Unless this trend is checked, higher education will suffer.

kavare hema 2 years ago

respected sir

you are playeng with our

D. Das 2 years ago

In the draft regulation of UGC on pay fixation against 6 CPC recommendations, service conditions

for the post of System Analysts, created Vide letter No.D.O.NO. F. 1-1/87/(T-II), UGC, dated 30-01-

1990, UGC, are not mentioned. Whereas in both- MHRD notification as well as the first report

(Chadha) some suggestions were made regarding the post of System Analyst.

Awaiting for response.

Dr. Phopale A. 2 years ago

In "Times of India" dated 11th June 2009 editorial; the Minister HRD - Kapil Sibal - a courageous and

cheerful person wrote in favour of Deem Universities in India. He also stated that UGC and AICTE

are hinderances in promoting higher education.

He advocated National Council for Higher Education - NCHE - as regulator. And University to be

given higher degree of autonomy.

Is it not contradictory? On one hand, you support regulation and on the other hand talk about

autonomy.

Demark the areas of regulation and autonomy first. Then possibly offer limited area-wise autonomy

to Universities and Deem Universities separately.

In this regard, UGC as an autonomous regulatory body to maintain standard in higher education -

area specific - regulation is most acceptable to academicians. New UGC is expected to reach every

district in India to enhance quality education.

Dr. Pranabjyoti Dutta 2 years ago

Where are the service conditions for the post of System Analysts in 6 CPC, created Vide letter

No.D.O.NO. F. 1-1/87/(T-II), UGC, dated 30-01-1990, UGC?

Rajib Goswami 2 years ago

In the draft regulation of UGC, nothing is mentioned about the post of System Analyst, whereas in

both- MHRD notification as well as the first report (Chadha) some suggestions were made regarding

the post of System Analyst.

Dr. Rajak 2 years ago

. Promotion from Lecturer to Reader after 12 years of service is frustrating

2. Disparity in salary for Lecturer (Lecturers will get around Rs. 30,000 whereas that for Readers

around Rs. 60,000)

3. No mention about Pension for new entrants to teaching profession

How this revised pay is going to attract and retain young talents in teaching profession is not

understood.

UGC Equation 2 years ago

Cost of points

100 US Dollar to publish paper in many indexed international journals = 10 points

6000 Rupees to get an lifetime achievement award/ gold medals= 25 points

Connection and kind (not intelligence) enough to get Ph.D. = eligible for professor

(persons like Ramanuja or Satyendra Nath Bose or published a paper in a nature or science and not

doctorates are not eligible as professors)

Dr. jagadish. V.V 2 years ago

It is sure that anomalies are there in the UGC draft regulation but at the same time quality of

teaching cannot be compromised.The draft regulation has not balanced between quality of teaching

and higher pay.We expect modification in the draft regulation with fitment tables.

Dr T 2 years ago

Maintain the same cadre ie L, AP, Asso P and P.

Create more pay bands not just PB3 and PB4.

Put the faculty in appropriate PBs (we can have even four to five PBs like PB3, PB31)

Solve the problem....

PUNJAB COMMERCE AND MANAGEMENT ASSOCIATION (REGISTERED) 2 years ago

PUNJAB COMMERCE AND MANAGEMENT ASSOCIATIONHEAD OFFICE: 94-B GOVERNMENT

HOUSE BACK SIDE PETROL PUMPFOUNTAIN CHOWK LUDHIANA (PUNJAB) Phone: 0161-

2400968, 098159-51299 REMINDER REPRESENTATION- PCMA/UGC/ 24/02/2009/198

PCMA/UGC/19/02/196 -19/02/2009 To Chairman, University Grants Commission,New

DelhiReference: MHRD Notification on pay scales of University and college teachers. Subject:

Readers/Lecturer (Selection Grade) in service at Present- UGC draft notification not in concurrence

with MHRD notification. Sir, It is humbly submitted before you the agony of the teachers working as

Readers/Lecturers (Selection Grade) in service at Present (i.e. on 31-12-2008 the date of MHRD

Notification) as follows:In the MHRD Notification regarding the scheme of pay of teachers and

equivalent cadres in universities and colleges, No . 1-32/2006-U.II/U.I (i) dated 31-12-2008, page 3

Clause 2 (a) xi it is said that Readers/Lecturers (Selection Grade) in service at present shall continue

to be designated as Lecturer (Selection Grade) or Readers, as the case may be, until they are

placed in the pay Band of Rs.37400-67000 and re-designated as Associate Professor in the manner

described in sub clause ( x ) i.e. for incumbent readers and Lecturer (Selection Grade) who have not

completed 3 years in the pay scale of Rs. 12000-18300.In the above notification no condition is

imposed by the MHRD on the Readers/Lecturer (Selection Grade) who even acquire the grade of

12000-18300 after 01-01-2006 and suggest the same formula for these Readers/ lecturer (Selection

Grade) to become Associate Professor as is applicable for the Readers/Lecturer (Selection Grade)

who got the scale of 12000-18300 before 01-01-2006 and who have not completed 3 years in the

present scale (Page 2 Clause 2 (a) point x and xi) But the University Grants commission in negation

of the above notification imposed certain conditions on all incumbent Readers/Lecturer (Selection

Grade) and Readers/Lecturer (selection Grade) in service at present which relates to Academic

performance indicators (API) and Weight age points (WP) required to develop performance

appraisal scoring system (PASS) . On the Protest of stake-holders UGC later withdraw the

conditions on all the incumbent Readers/Lecturer (Selection Grade) through a clarification on the

UGC website. But the point regarding the Readers/Lecturers (Selection Grade) in service at present

has not been clarified. It is the demand of the teachers that Teachers who have been awarded the

designation of Readers/Lecturer (Selection Grade) even after 01-01-2006 and are going to complete

three years in service in the pay scale of 12000-18300 in 2008 or 2009 should also be re-designated

as Associate professor as and when they complete the required three years of Service and should

not be imposed any condition. This is because MHRD Notification Clause 2 (a) (xi) also suggests the

same formula as it is for Incumbent Readers/ Lecturer (Selection Grade) who has not completed

three years of Service in the pay scale of 12000-18300 on 01-01-2006. The Clause 2 (a) (xi) is

reproduced here for quick reference:" Readers/Lecturer (Selection Grade) in service at present shall

continue to be designated as Lecturer (Selection Grade) or Readers, as the case may be, until they

are placed in the pay Band of Rs. 37400-67000 and re-designated as Associate Professor in the

manner described in (x) above" It is therefore requested to you that kindly clarify this point also adopt

the same formula for promoting the Reader/Lecturer (Selected Grade) in service at present as it is

applicable for the incumbent Readers/Lecturer (Selection Grade) who have not completed three

years of service in the pay scale of 12000-18300 as given in the clause 2 (a) (x) and as suggested in

the Clause 2 (a) (xi) in the page 3 of the MHRD Notification. If this is not clarified then a teachers

who has got the Reader/Lecturer (Selection Grade) say in Feb 2006 will be at disadvantageous

position and just for getting the grade two months late he/she has to face lot of hardships and

secondly he/she will not have the ample time to cover the conditions put in by the UGC. The

conditions put in by the UGC are also not in concurrence of the MHRD notification which is supreme

document. We also request you to get the exemption from conditions for all Readers/Lecturer

(Selection Grade) who has been placed in the grade of 12000-18300 till the date of notification of

MHRD i.e. 31-12-2008.I hope you will fight our case and the true spirit of MHRD Notification will not

be defeated. (Prof. Ashwani Bhalla)Executive Vice PresidentPunjab Commerce and Management

Association

kappa022 2 years ago

Wow, tons of info here. Excellent hub!

chloefaith 2 years ago

Nice hub. Thank you for sharing. I too am a teacher at NMSU-DACC, though for me it is not the pay

scale but the lack of students signing up for classes. Please visit my hubs when you have a chance,

my link for my book is there too. I would love your feedback.

Dr. Tripathy 2 years ago

UGC stands for 'University Grand Circus'

Rakesh 2 years ago

Dear all

I am 100% agree with Kuntal08. Yes they are fuctioning like a group of jokers.

dr gyan chandra srivastava 2 years ago

we all are with the fighting teachers of the university and college teachers for their rights and just

demands .hum honge kamyab one day.with best complements.

kuntal08 2 years ago

University Grants Commission should be renamed as University Grants Circus. The clarification

made by the UGC is the new item introduced for the boys & girls of the teaching community.It's

absolutely hilarious that the responsibility of higher education rests on the shoulders of a pack of

jokers.

chpsharma 2 years ago

dear friends

UGC is putting hurdles in the progress of teaching community by pitting many riders like projects

seminars workshops publication of books and what not. Many readers/s g lecturers are above the

age of 58/6o years how one can expect them to do any work now and suddenly they feel they are

useless and will be put to great insult and humiliation if they are left without going to p.b 4

when it is only a revision of scale how come there are so many hurdles and conditions.Hence I

request all friends to fight for the cause

Dave 2 years ago

Dear all teachers

We all have to united and protest the proposed draft regulation. The UGC can not impose new terms

and conditions only for redesignation. We dont want redesignation. Let it be as it is. I also requested

the professors to come forward and oppose the said draft of UGC. I know that professors are not

affected but as a team, we have to be united and please dont write any thing to UGC which is

harmful to the new comers and incumbents.

rka 2 years ago

ugc is superseding the mhrd notification regarding associate prof.those who have retire before this

notification, will they appear before selection committee(interview) for getting pay band IV from

1.1.2006