Where everyone gets content of one's interest - health, education, career......
All Bengal University Teachers Association(ABUTA) is fighting for the direct recruit Readers joining on or after 01.01.06. It has already given representation to MHRD and UGC to place the fresh recruit Readers in 37400 Pay Band. Now after gazettee notification of UGC Regulations, 2010 it has been suggested to send a legal notice to UGC and MHRD immediately.
Observations and suggestions regarding the anomalies in UGC Regulations, 2010:
A. Anomalies regarding Fixation of Pay of Directly Recruited Readers Joining on or after 01.01.2006
1) According to MHRD order 31.12.2008 and UGC Regulations, 2010 there are three entry posts, viz. Assistant Professor, Associate Professor, and Professor. However, they have not told and made it clear wherefrom the posts of Associate Professor will come. They should make it clear whether all such posts will be newly sanctioned posts by UGC or all the already sanctioned physical posts of Reader are/will be upgraded to the posts of Associate Professor in accordance with the provisions of CCS (RP) Rules, 2008. If all the already sanctioned physical posts of Reader are/will be upgraded to the posts of Associate Professor, then they should specify the date from which such upgradation is/will be made. MHRD and UGC should release immediate order conveying the source of such posts without which the universities can not start recruitment to the said post.
2) If all the already sanctioned physical posts of Reader are upgraded to the posts of Associate Professor from 01.01.06 or will be upgraded on/after 30.06.2010 then all the incumbents already holding the physical posts of Reader will automatically be redesignated as Associate Professor and be placed in PB-4 from such dates without considering their suitability or qualifications. In this regard, the clarification of CCS (RP) Rules, 2008 (vide Govt. of India, Ministry of Finance, Dept. of Expenditure, Implementation Cell, OM F. No.1/1/2008-IC dated 13 September, 2008), Clarification 6(ii) says - in case of upgradations where all posts in a particular grade have been granted a higher replacement scale/grade pay, the suitability of the incumbents need not be assessed for granting them the higher replacement scale/grade pay. No order or rule can violate this principle in case of fixation of pay under 6th CPC, and if any order contradicting this principle comes to be operative that will invariably invite a lot of serious anomalies. Therefore, incumbents holding the physical posts of Reader should be redesignated as Associate Professor and be placed in PB-4 from the date of upgradation of the posts of Reader to the posts of Associate Professor.
3) Up to when the existing incumbents holding the physical posts of Reader are not redesignated as Associate Professors and not placed in PB-4, the direct recruitment to the posts of Associate Professor with entry pay in PB-4 and AGP of Rs. 9000 following the norms of UGC Regulations, 2010 can not be made by using the existing posts of Reader since senior incumbents holding same physical posts will become junior from the direct recruit Associate Professors coming to hold nothing but the same physical posts only in a different name on some later date(s).Therefore, to resolve the anomalies, all the existing incumbents holding the physical posts of Reader should be redesignated as Associate Professor and be placed in PB-4 from the date of upgradation of the posts of Reader to the posts of Associate Professor or atleast before/from the date of first direct recruitment to the post of Associate Professor.
4) As per UGC Regulations, 2010 CAS promotions being a personal promotion to the incumbent teacher holding a substantive sanctioned post, on superannuation or leaving the post of the incumbent, the said post shall revert back to its original cadre. It always occurs and no exception is there that when a CAS promoted teacher gets retirement or leaves his/her post, it becomes a junior or same post. However, a major anomaly will arise in case of open/ direct recruit Readers on or after 01.01.06. On superannuation or leaving the post of such an incumbent Reader, the said post shall not revert back to its original cadre; rather it will be a higher post of Associate Professor. Since an open recruit Reader may leave his/her post on any date before completion of three years in AGP of Rs. 8000 and since his/her leaving of post is not predetermined but accidental, therefore on any date before completion of three years his/her post automatically be converted/upgraded to the physical post of Associate Professor. Thus all such direct recruit Readers are holding now the posts of Associate Professors. MHRD order issued on 26.08.2010 can not resolve this anomaly with the direction that open recruit Readers will move to PB-4 and AGP of Rs. 9000 after completion of three years in AGP of Rs. 8000 since it can not stop the occurrence of such vacancy before three years. Thus it is illegal and injustice that an incumbent Reader holding the physical post of Associate Professor during the said period is compelled to draw less pay and AGP than what is due for his/her physical post.
5) As per the Ministry of Human Resource Development (MHRD) scheme of pay revision for teachers dated December 31, 2008 and CCS (Revised Pay) rules 2008 (http://india.gov.in/govt/studies/revised.pdf) dated August 29, 2008 there are only three designations of teachers in universities and colleges as Assistant Professor, Associate Professor and Professor with entry level AGP of 6000, 9000 and 10000 respectively. However, the MHRD order issued on 26.08.2010 fully contradicts the said order and has brought anomaly by making a provision for entry post of Reader with entry pay of Rs. 23890 and AGP of Rs. 8000 for the incumbents joining the post during 01.01.06 and 30.06.10. It is worth noting that the provision for the entry post of Reader with entry pay and corresponding AGP was absent in the MHRD order issued on 31.12.2008, and the MHRD order issued on 26.08.2010 fully contradicts this since there will be four physical posts and designations with such provision. At a time there may be three entry posts, but for teachers joining the post of Reader as fresh recruit during 01.01.06 and 30.06.10 there may be four entry posts or four entry bars to reach into the top during their entire career. Why should such teachers bear this hardship when the thing is not happening in all cases? The MHRD order issued dated 26.08.2010 for revision (not for clarification) of its earlier order issued on 31.12.2008 with the provision of entry post of Reader is to justify and to back the UGC Regulations, 2010 and to give it a legal shape. However, it is anomalous and illegal since with this step UGC regulations, 2010 (30.06.2010) is found to violate and supersede MHRD order (31.12.2008), and MHRD again issues further order (26.08.2010) to change its earlier order in a later date in order to give concurrence to the changes made by UGC in the said Regulations, and since such changes giving hardship and affecting the careers of the teachers can never be done retrospectively, and as natural justice requires that before a law can become operative it must be promulgated or published.
6) The provision for the entry post of Reader with entry pay of Rs. 23890 and corresponding AGP of Rs. 800 was not available in the MHRD order issued on 31.12.2008 and at that time there were only three designations of teachers in universities and colleges as Assistant Professor, Associate Professor and Professor with entry level AGP of 6000, 9000 and 10000, respectively. MHRD in its order (31.12.20080) told ‘Universities implementing the scheme shall be advised by the UGC to amend their relevant statutes and ordinances in line with the UGC Regulations within three months from the date of issue of this letter’ (vide clause-8(p) of MHRD order dated 31.12.2008). Even UGC Regulations, 2009 published, in conformity with the said MHRD scheme, on 23rd September, 2009 (later on converted to draft and ultimately got vanished from the UGC website without any notification regarding its withdrawal) told under its sub clause 6.4.12 that ‘The incumbent Reader who is selected on or after 1.1.2006, shall be redesignated as Associate Professor from the date of his/her selection, and will be placed in the Pay Band of 37400-67000 with AGP of Rs. 9000. In view of the above, UGC Regulations, 2010 and MHRD order dated 26.08.2010 are totally contradictory with MHRD scheme dated 31.12.2008, as well as the same is anomalous, misleading and illegal, and the direct recruit Readers joining atleast after 31st March, 2009 knowing that they would be placed in PB-4 may feel themselves cheated if they are not redesignated as Associate Professor and placed in PB-4 with AGP of Rs. 9000.
7) Under CCS (RP) Rules, 2008 as accepted by the Central Govt. of India based on the recommendations of 6th CPC, the fixation of pay of direct recruits is different from the fixation of pay of the employees promoted under CAS. In this regard Ministry of Human Resource Development (MHRD) also issued a clarification (F-23-2/2009-TS-II with the heading as Pay Fixation in Para-II, Part-ii) on 9th March, 2010 (http://www.education.nic.in/TechnicalEdu/Revpay-clarifications.pdf), stating Pay of directly recruited Teachers on or after 1.1.2006 should be fixed at the entry level of the revised pay and the AGP as prescribed and as per the provision in the Rule 8 (with heading as Pay fixation for fresh recruits on or after 1.1.2006) of CCS (Revised Pay) Rules 2008. In Para-V with heading as Pay fixation of faculty promoted under CAS it told that the benefit of of higher initial pay for the direct recruits is not applicable for those promoted under CAS. For them the pay will be fixed as per Rule 7 of CCS (RP) Rules 2008. However, it is astonishing that the MHRD in its revised order dated 26.08.2010 told to fix the entry pay of Readers and Lecturers (SG) at Rs. 23890. With such step fixation of pay of direct recruit Readers is made in accordance with the fixation formula applicable for teachers promoted under CAS. Whereas CAS promoted Lecturers (SG) are getting the entry pay applicable for the direct recruits. This anomaly is created by UGC and MHRD contradicting CCS (RP) Rules, 2008, MHRD order dated 9th March, 2010. How can this anomaly be resolved?
8) MHRD in its revised order dated 26.08.2010 told to fix the entry pay of Readers and Lecturers (SG) joining during 01.01.06 and 30.06.10 at Rs. 23890. This has created another anomaly by which seniors will draw less pay than their juniors. A Lecturer (SG) who is promoted (for instance) on 08.10. 2009 (or any date during 1.1.06 and 30.06.2010) gets fixed at pay of Rs. 23890, and if he/she is awarded PhD degree on 15.10.2009, he/she will get three advance increment and will be designated as Reader on 15.10.2009. However, a senior incumbent Reader than him/her who joined as a direct recruit on 06.10.2009 (for instance) would continue to draw only Rs. 23890. The contradiction caused in this regard by MHRD order dated 26.08.2010 made effective with UGC Regulations, 2010 during 1.1.06 and 30.06.2010 is revealed through Subclause 2.3.0 of UGC Regulations, 2000 which says - Lecturers Senior Scale who do not have PhD or equivalent published works and who do not meet the scholarship and research standards will be placed in Selection Grade. They can be promoted to the post of Reader after obtaining PhD degree and fulfilling the other requirements for promotion as Reader through fresh assessment. How can this measure be justified by which Lecturers (SG) are made senior and drawing more pay than the Readers with higher qualifications, scholarship, and research standards (as per understanding of UGC), even when the UGC Regulations, 2000 is effective and operating. UGC Regulations, 2010 is going to justify and place the Lecturers (SG) in PB-4 before the direct recruit Readers through an arbitrary manner in the name of UGC Regulations….and Measures for Maintenance of Standards in Higher Education, 2010 especially when the UGC has intended to introduce the API and PBAS like tough criteria for performance evaluation of teachers for CAS and direct recruitment in it. How can this anomaly regarding Maintenance of Standards in Higher Education be resolved?
9) All Lecturers who were selected post 1.1.2006 have been given benefit of CCS (Revised Pay) Rules 2008, Rule 8 (like higher pay in entry fixed at the level of Rs. 15600 which is not derived by multiplying their existing basic pay of Rs. 8000 (pre-revised) with a factor of 1.86 as applicable for fixation of pay of CAS promoted teachers, and five advance increments for PhD instead of three) as if they have been directly appointed in 6th Pay commission (Assistant Professor). All directly recruited Professors have been given the benefit of higher initial pay and fixed at the pay of Rs. 43000 with AGP of RS. 10000 which is different from the pay of CAS promoted Professors (i.e. Rs. 43890). While direct selected Readers post 1.1.2006 are first fixed in 5th pay commission (Reader) and then fixed in the corresponding 6th pay grades which is against Rule 8 of CCS (Revised Pay) rules 2008 (http://india.gov.in/govt/studies/revised.pdf ). Further, their entry pay has been fixed at Rs.23890 applying CAS fixation formula, and denying paying them higher initial pay as applicable for direct recruits. Whereas the CAS promoted Lecturers (SG) are getting higher initial pay applicable for fresh recruits. This is gross violation of CCS (Revised Pay) rules 2008, and MHRD clarification dated 9th March, 2010( vide F-23-2/2009-TS-II with the heading as Pay Fixation in Para-II, Part-ii) which is producing serious anomaly and discrimination in fixation of pay among different categories of teachers according to their existing hierarchy.
10) As per long standing practice followed by UGC, the post of Professor (with pre-revised basic pay of Rs. 16400) is the immediate higher post of Reader (with pre-revised basic pay pay of Rs. 12840). However, now the direct recruit Professors will get revised basic pay of Rs. 53000 and direct recruit Readers will get revised basic pay of Rs. 31890. The difference of basic pay of Rs. 3560 in pre-revised scale has now been turned to Rs. 21110 in revised scale (i.e. about 6 times growth in difference). The justification of such difference is not understood. And the anomaly in this case is that the direct recruit Readers who has come to join the post bearing the hurdles of probation and sometimes the hurdles of shifting, but knowing (from the UGC Regulations, 2000 and MHRD order dated 31.12.2008) and hoping that they would get the the benefit of higher initial pay reasonable according to their existing hierarchy just bellow the position of Professors and and above the positions of Lecturers (SG) and Assistant Professors, they will be deprived for such anomalous measures. It is thought that such step will surely bring academic unrest.
11) As per CCS (RP) Rules, 2008 ‘Grade Pay determines seniority and status of a Post’. But direct recruit Readers are fixed in AGP of Rs. 8000 which is a promotional grade in PB-III for Assistant Professors. However, as per UGC Regulations, 2000 (which is effective and said to be operative during1.1.06 and 30.06.2010), and as per long standing convention and practice observed by UGC, Reader is a senior post than the Lecturers, and second higher post in hierarchy of entry of teachers. And as the posts of Lecturers have been converted to the posts of Assistant Professors, and as the posts of Readers are not merged with the posts of Assistant Professors, and as the physical posts of the Readers have been/will be converted to the posts of Associate Professors, allocating same Grade Pay of Rs. 8000 to both the Readers and Assistant Professors is against Rule 8 of CCS (RP) Rules 2008, and MHRD clarification of 9th March, 2010. Again, such measure goes against natural justice since it breaks their seniority, status, and their position in existing hierarchy of teachers arbitrarily, even when the UGC Regulations, 2000 is effective and operating. UGC should take immediate action to resolve this anomaly.
12) During 01.01.06 and 30.06.10 there are three entry posts, viz. Assistant Professor, Reader, and Professor when UGC Regulations, 2000 has been made effective and operative. The Assistant Professor (with pre-revised basic pay of Rs. 8000), Reader (with pre-revised basic pay of Rs. 12840), and Professor (with pre-revised basic pay of Rs. 16400) with PhD selected during the said period will get fixed at the entry pay of Rs. 24840, 31890, and Rs. 53000, respectively for pay revision. The difference shows that all are benefited due to pay revision, measures taken by MHRD, and the UGC Regulations, 2000 except the direct recruit Readers, who are only deprived. UGC should resolve this anomaly and maintain the seniority and status of the direct recruit Readers.
13) The precondition in re-designation can not be applied retrospectively for those occupying any physical post against an employee as in case of Professors who are exempted from PhD if they have become Professor without PhD as per previous rules. It is again anomalous since the Lecturers (SG) who are not given the designation and status of a Reader due to lack of required qualifications, scholarship, and research standards as per UGC Regulations, 2000, they have been given automatic promotion to the posts of Associate Professor without any precondition and allowing full relaxation, even when the UGC Regulations, 2000 is effective and operating, and even when the UGC has stipulated the API and PBAS like tough criteria for performance evaluation for CAS promotion and for direct recruitment in its Regulations, 2010,
14) Any existing Reader occupying physical post of Associate Professor can not become junior to a new Associate Professor to be appointed on a later date as it goes against natural justice.
15) No directly recruited Reader can become junior to a Lecturer (selection grade) who became Associate Professor due to pay revision as pay fixation can not change the cadre seniority. For that all directly recruited Readers should be given the benefit of higher initial pay and be directly fixed in PB-4 instead of promoting them to PB-4 after 3 years of service in Grade pay 8000 which looks like CAS promotion and which goes against CCS (RP) Rules, 2008 and MHRD clarification dated 9th March, 2010.
16) Huge hike in pay should not be any bar for placing the directly recruited Readers in PB-4 since UG College Principals with pre-revised basic pay of Rs. 12840 have been placed in PB-4 with pay of Rs. 43000 and AGP of Rs. 10000. So, placing the incumbent Readers recruited on or after 1.1.2006 [who are equivalent cadres, getting same pre-revised basic pay of Rs. 12840, with the UG College Principals under UGC Regulations, 2000 ( which is effective and operating during 1.1.06 and 30.06.10)] on a 3 years wait to move in to PB-4 is not justified.
17) Even existing qualification should not be any bar for the direct recruit Readers to place them in PB-4, since other categories of teachers are also getting all the benefits of 6th CPC with the then existing qualifications as per UGC Regulations, 2000 without fulfilling the required qualifications stipulated in UGC Regulations, 2010. Even the Lecturers (SG) who are not given the designation and status of a Reader due to lack of required qualifications, scholarship, and research standards as per UGC Regulations, 2000 have been given automatic promotion to the posts of Associate Professor without any precondition and allowing full relaxation in qualification.
18) It is not wise to give direct entry to the two higher entry posts of Professor and Associate Professor within two years. Perhaps it is done due to huge pay hike. However academic justification should determine the years of experience required for entry in a higher post. If Pay Band determines the years of experience required for entry in different academic posts in universities, then question will arise regarding the purpose of pay revision. In this regard, the provisions of the UGC Regulations, 2009 published on 23rd September, 2009 (later on converted to draft and ultimately got vanished from the UGC website without any notification regarding its withdrawal) were more wise with sound academic justifications and which were free from the present anomalies. We don’t know why the same did not come to be implemented.
It may be inferred that the above anomalies are occurring due to breaking of existing hierarchy of the teachers in both pay and status in MHRD Scheme for pay revision of teachers on the recommendations of 6th CPC and fitting the same with the UGC Regulations, 2000 during 01.01.06 and 30.06.10. The status and seniority of direct recruit Readers should not be broken, and they should not be treated as CAS promoted teachers, and kept standing on three years’ wait for placing them in PB-4 with AGP of Rs. 9000. To resolve the same, I would like to propose the following options for modifications in the UGC Regulations, 2010.
B. Other Anomalies
1) Absence of hardship clause without which Assistant professors with 7000 AGP will be affected.
2) Absence of the clause – Readers completing 6 years of service shall be promoted to the post of Professor without which Readers joining before 01.01.03 will be affected.
3) All who got PhD, submitted PhD, and registered for PhD on or before 11th July, 2009 should be exempted from NET/SET for getting entry to the posts of teachers since they fulfilled the conditions of the then existing rules and regulations for PhD when UGC Regulations for PhD did not exist.
4) Performance evaluation of teachers should be based on actual and direct physical assignments, and not based on fictitious parameters. UGC should provide actual assignment on Research and Extension and then it can evaluate the performance of the teachers in these areas. It may be noted that at present the teaching and evaluation is only the actual assignment for teachers, and Research and Extension what they do now is not formally, physically and directly assigned to them by UGC. They do these according to their will and in their own capacity. An informal work done by the teachers can not be made formal without any physical assignment. UGC should specify and directly assign Research and Extension work, and should mention workload and duty hours against these tasks. In this regard it is to be noted that the allotment of 6 hours in a week for performing Research works is not justified as it would produce nothing. If UGC likes to maintain standards in higher education, the teachers should be declared 24 hours’ employees for performing such tasks, and be given facilities due for such employees.
5) UGC should ensure that the state university teachers will get all benefits including retirement age, pay and allowances at per with the central university teachers otherwise they will be compelled to do more work with less pay. If it is not ensured, the same will affect not only the state university teacher but also the standards of higher education in state universities.
Dear Biswajit Saha,
Could you please send me the copy of the order?
B B Arora
Check this update on the status of the report of the Anomaly Committee.
MINUTES OF THE 479th MEETING OF THE UNIVERSITY GRANTS COMMISSION
HELD ON 8TH JULY, 2011.
Item nom 2.06
To consider the report of the Anomaly Committee constituted by the Chairman,
UGC to recommend revision/ amendment/ clarification guidelines, if any, based
on the representations/ anomalies received from various sections of
Universities/Colleges, officials of higher education system, professional
associations of Central/State Universities and others to facilitate smooth
implementation of the “UGC Regulation on Minimum Qualifications for
Appointment of Teachers and other Academic Staff in Universities and Colleges
and Measures for the Maintenance of Standards in Higher Education 2010”.
A power-point presentation was made before the Commission by Prof.
S.P.Thyagrajan and Prof. Ravi Srivastava, Members of the Anomaly Committee
constituted by the Chairman, UGC to review the post notification
implementation issues arising out of the UGC Regulations, 2010. The
Commission made several suggestions on the recommendations of the Anomaly
Committee and requested that these may be incorporated and authorized the
Chairman, UGC to finalize the amendments in the Regulations and send it to
the M/HRD for its approval. Action: JS (Pay Scale)
S M Anthony
whats the update on this issue !!!!
It is long since I have received any update on this matter. Even the anamoly report is not out. This injustice should be fought. Please everybody do come forward and unite for a fight.
I agree with Dr. Mahesh Bhada. We should unite and fight for injustice otherwise we will not get justice.