THE HIGH COURT OF GAUHATI (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)
LANUSUNGKUM JAMIR, KARDAK ETE, JJ
Rajib Das S/o Sri Manoj Kumar Das - Appellant
Versus
State Of Assam - Respondent
WA 214/2023
Decided On : 25-02-2025
(A) University Grants Commission Act, 1956 - Office Memorandum dated 25.06.2012 - Validity of M.Phil degree - The appellant, an Asstt. Professor, challenged the denial of marks for teaching experience based on time taken to acquire M.Phil and Ph.D. degrees. The Selection Committee awarded inconsistent marks across colleges, raising questions of fairness and adherence to UGC guidelines. The court found no basis for differing evaluations and emphasized the need for consistent application of criteria across institutions. (Paras 2 , 4 , 26 , 32 , 39 )
(B) Public Policy - Finality of litigation - The court reiterated that decisions by competent courts should be respected unless challenged, emphasizing the principle against re-litigation. (Paras 9 , 20 , 29 )
(C) UGC Guidelines - The court upheld the UGC's authority in determining eligibility and qualifications for teaching positions, affirming that degrees obtained through off-campus modes are invalid. (Paras 18 , 36 )
Facts of the case:
The appellant, serving as an Asstt. Professor, claimed marks for teaching experience based on his M.Phil degree obtained in 2008 and argued that the time spent pursuing his degrees should count as experience. The Selection Committee awarded inconsistent marks across different colleges.
Findings of Court:
The court found that the inconsistent marking lacked justification and directed the authorities to reconsider the appellant's case in line with UGC guidelines.
Issues: The main issues were whether the appellant was entitled to marks for teaching experience based on his M.Phil and Ph.D. degrees and the validity of the degrees obtained through off-campus mode.
Ratio Decidendi: The court ruled that the inconsistent awarding of marks was unjustified and emphasized the need for adherence to UGC guidelines regarding qualifications and teaching experience.
Result: Writ Appeal dismissed, with directions for reconsideration of the appellant's case.
JUDGMENT :
Kardak Ete, J.
Heard Mr. S. Dutta, learned Senior Counsel, assisted by Mr. S. Dutta, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. K. Gogoi, learned standing counsel, Higher Education Department, for respondent Nos.1 to 11 and Mr. A. Chamuah, learned standing counsel, UGC, for respondent No.12.
2. This intra court appeal is directed against the judgment and order dated 16.03.2023, passed by the learned Single Judge in WP(C) No.6012/2018, assailing a part of the order/direction, particularly, the direction that the said authority shall take note of the fact that the petitioner would not be entitled to marks for time taken by the petitioner to acquire his M.Phil. and Ph.D. Degree by considering it as teaching/research experience to be claimed for appointment to the post of Asstt. Professor.
3. The facts of the case in brief, are that the Appellant/writ petitioner is serving as an Asstt. Professor and Head of the Department of Computer Science & Application in Karimganj College under the Assam University. He obtained the M.Phil. degree on 29.09.2008 and claims that on the said date he became UGC qualified Asstt. Professor and he is entitled to get marks on teaching experience and Ph.D. degree on 02.05.2014. Pursuant to advertisement dated 08.05.2017 for the post of Asstt. Professor, Computer Science in three of the Pandit Din Dayal Upadhya Mahavidyalayas (hereinafter referred to the PDUAM in short) at Amjonga, Tulungia and Dalgaon, the appellant applied for the post of Asstt. Professor in Computer Science. The Government of Assam has recognized qualifying marks on M.Phil degree to the candidates who have obtained the same before 10.07.2009.
4. It is the contention of the appellant that the Selection Committee of the two PDUAM Colleges awarded marks to the appellant in terms of Office Memorandum dated 25.06.2012, which demonstrates that a candidate having M.Phil. degree is entitled to 5 marks and 5 marks for teaching experience (1 mark for each completed year of service in an affiliated Govt. Degree College) and the appellant being UGC qualified teacher from the year 2008, on obtaining M.Phil degree till the year of interview i.e. 2017, has completed 9 years of service, which entitles him maximum 5 marks on teaching experience. The Selection Committee of Amjonga and Tulungia awarded 5 marks to the appellant on M.Phil & teaching experience each, but the same subject teachers who awarded 5 marks for M.Phil and Teaching experience in Amjonga and Tulungia have awarded 0 marks on M.Phil and 2 marks on Teaching experience for Dalgaon.
5. Essentially, the contention of the appellant is that in terms of O.M. dated 25.06.2012, the appellant is entitled to 5 marks for M.Phil and maximum 5 marks under the head teaching experience i.e. one (1) mark for each completed year of service in an affiliated college i.e. active service will be counted after acquiring the UGC qualification as per the said Govt. O.M. The appellant being UGC qualified teacher from 2008 till the year of interview i.e. 2017, has completed 9 years of active service which entitles him maximum 5 marks for teaching experience.
6. Mr. S. Dutta, learned Senior counsel for the appellant, submits that the learned Single Judge did not deal with the vital aspect of the matter and landed in error in not considering the factual as well as legal issue. The learned Single Judge also did not consider the fact that the same subject experts had awarded 5 marks on M.Phil and 5 marks on teaching experience in Amjonga and Tulungia to the appellant, whereas they have awarded 0 marks on M.Phil and 2 marks on teaching experience to the appellant at Dalgaon.
7. Mr. S. Dutta, learned Senior counsel, submits that the learned Single Judge has decided the issue in terms of O.M dated 25.06.2021 clause (vii) thereto that "The period of time taken by candidates to acquire M.Phil and/or Ph.D degree shall not be considered as teaching/res
Smti. Asha Rani Brahma vs. Smti. Binika Goyari
P. Suseela & Ors. vs. UGC & Ors.
Kurmanchal Institute of Degree and Diploma vs. Chancellor M.J.P. Rohilakhand University
M. Nagabhushena -vs- State of Karnataka
R. Muthukumar & Ors. -Vs- The Chairman and Managing Director
Annamalai University v. Information & Tourism Deptt.
The court emphasized the need for consistent application of UGC guidelines in awarding marks for teaching experience and ruled that degrees obtained through off-campus modes are invalid.
Teaching experience marks for Assistant Professor shortlisting invalid if claimed prior to essential qualifications (NET/SET/M.Phil/Ph.D) or based on unverified/dubious certificates; erroneous shortl....
Qualifications for lecturer appointments must be met at the time of appointment, and later-acquired qualifications do not retroactively qualify an individual.
Selection Committee decisions must adhere to fairness and transparency, ensuring equal treatment based on qualifications and avoiding arbitrary actions.
Teaching experience claimed during Ph.D. studies is not valid unless it was active service without leave, impacting selection criteria for academic appointments.
Relaxation in age does not in any manner upset “level playing field”. It is not possible to accept submission of learned counsel for appellants that relaxation in age or concession in fee would in an....
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.