DUTA Letter to MHRD on NET, 8.6.2015

Dear Madam,

As you know, regular appointments in Delhi University had been held up by its Vice Chancellor since 2010, leading to tremendous hardship for more than 4,500 teachers  who were kept on ad hoc basis facing great uncertainty every four months, loss of increments, vacation salaries, denial of medical and maternity leave and every kind of exploitation and victimisation by unscrupulous authorities. Despite the degrading conditions of work, this section of teachers has played a stellar role in keeping the academic programmes of Delhi University going at a time of frequent roller coaster changes in course structures, pedagogical requirements and examination schemes.

Even after the starting of permanent appointments, several violations of University Statutes, UGC Regulations and well-established academic procedures by the University administration have resulted in large scale denial of regular appointments to existing ad- hoc teachers. We have highlighted these irregularities in the White Paper brought out in August last year, and have reiterated them in another representation to the Visitor.

In addition to these travails, yet another wave of uncertainty has struck a large section of ad- hoc teachers  in the wake of the Judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court, P.Susheela and Ors vs UGC and Ors, dated 16.3.2015. The  DUTA Executive had an extensive discussion on the said judgment and came to the unanimous conclusion that the Judgment, while giving the final authority to the MHRD, does not overturn the UGC Regulation of 30.6.2010 that gives an exemption from NET to those whose Ph.D fulfils the conditions laid down in  UGC Regulations 2009.  A clarification from the UGC dated 28.4.2015(copy attached) has also confirmed the above.

There is however, some anxiety in the minds of those who had begun their Ph.D before the aforementioned Guidelines of UGC had come into existence in 2009.  Upon completion of their Ph.D, they were declared by the UGC as being exempted from the NET, since the UGC Guidelines could not be applicable to them retrospectively. Now, the Hon’ble Supreme Court has upheld the right of the MHRD to decide about this exemption.

Many of these candidates have done their PhDs 10- 15 years ago, had been declared exempted from NET all along, and would have been permanent long ago had interviews for regular appointments not been held up all these years. Moreover, these teachers have been teaching all along in temp or ad hoc capacities and could easily have cleared their NET earlier had they been told that they were required to do so.

To clear the confusion, we request you to issue a clarification that such candidates would be given a one-time exemption from NET. In the absence of this, the anxiety and uncertainly would persist. Some employers may unfairly deny them a chance to get regular employment which
would be extremely unfair and against all principles of natural justice, especially after having served the University all these years, and at a stage of their lives when alternative career prospects become remote. Moreover, it will be a huge academic loss to the University as these teachers are among the most qualified among the existing ad-hoc teachers.

Encl: UGC clarification, 28.4.2015