As you have been already informed earlier that Seminar and AIFUCTO NEC MEETING are scheduled on 6th & 7th April,2019 in the campus of MLS University, Udaipur (Rajasthan) organised by RUCTA. Programmes of Seminar and NEC have been already circulated. This is my kind request to all the leaders of our affiliates , NEC members and office bearers of AIFUCTO,who are reaching Udaipur, please inform the organisers in advance about your travelling plan for Udaipur so that organiser can better arrange your accomodation and other things. For this you can contact any one of the following:
1. Prof. Devendra Pd Singh, Organising Secretary, Mob: 9001460636
2. Prof.Vijay Mr Arry, GS, RUCTA, Mob:9414482372. Mail id: firstname.lastname@example.org
3. Prof.P Parasar, Zonal Secretary, AIFUCTO, Mob: 9414052727
You can also contact or send information on mail id: email@example.com
I hope your co-operation. Please take it with all seriousness.
All India Federation of University and College Teachers’ Organisations (AIFUCTO) is thankful to the UGC for constituting an Anomaly Committee to look into various issues pertaining to implementation of the Regulations on (Minimum Qualifications for Appointment of Teachers and other Academic staff in Universities and Colleges and other Measures for the maintenance of standards in Higher Education), 2018, in its Public Notice No.F.9-1/2010 (PS/Misc) Pt, File Vol.1, dated 26.11.2018. AIFUCTO summaries its response as follows:
Despite a clear decision by the Central Cabinet that “the Central Government will bear the additional burden of the states on account of revision of pay scales” the teaching community is agitated that the financial assistance from the Central Government to State shall be limited, by way of reimbursement, to the extent of 50% of the additional expenditure. The GOI reduced the assistance from 80% for 51 months to 50% for 39 months. The early period of assistance (01.01.2016 to 31.03.2019), reduction of percentage from 80 to 50 and the reduction of duration from 51 months to 39 months cumulatively taken together, the Central assistance works out to 1/3 when compared to the assistance extended by the GOI during the earlier pay revisions. In fact, AIFUCTO has been consistently demanding 100% Central assistance to States for the entire period of Ten years. The reduction of Central assistance is the major reason for non-implementation of UGC pay revision in more than 50% of the States even after one year from the pay revision notified by the MHRD. Majority of the bigger states yet to notify the pay revision. We, therefore, stick to our demand of 100% financial assistance for uniform and simultaneous implementation of UGC pay scale in all the States.
In para 2 of the Cabinet decision it is stated that the decision will benefit 7.58 Lakhs teachers and equivalent academic staff in the 106 Universities / Colleges, which are funded by State Governments and 12,912 Government and Private aided colleges affiliated to State Public Universities. To ensure the above decision, a relevant mandatory clause is necessary. By not including the mandatory clause, the Central Government has completely shrugged off the obligation placed on it by the constitution and the UGC Act 1956 to bring mandatory provisions. The Central Government cannot ignore its constitutional and legal responsibility to promulgate mandatory provisions. Hence, we demand arrangement of mandatory provisions issued by the UGC in accordance with the powers conferred on it by the Constitution of India and UGC Act to ensure uniform, simultaneous implementation of UGC revised scales in toto in all the States.
While welcoming that the contract appointments shall be made only when it is absolutely necessary that too not exceeding 10% of the total number of Faculty positions with fully qualified Teachers with due procedure as applicable to regular appointments with emoluments not less than the monthly gross salary of a regularly appointed Assistant Professor, AIFUCTO strongly urges the UGC to enact a law to ensure the implementation of the above classes in Universities / Colleges / Institutions throughout India. This is very essential in view of the poor service conditions of Temporary Teachers and meagre salary paid as salary to those Teachers by almost all Universities / Colleges / Institutions.
As per the regulation 2018, Ph.D. degree is mandatory for career advancement to Associate Professor. This clause takes away the right of teachers who entered the service with NET / SLET qualification and who do not acquire Ph.D. qualification during Assistant Professorship. This clause not only makes mockery of the mandatory requirement of NET / SLET / SET qualification for the appointment of Assistant Professors in Colleges but also makes exemption clause as mandatory. AIFUCTO of the strong view that the qualification for Associate Professorship should be restored to regulation 2010.
The Regulation, 2018, mandates that the Ph.D. degree should have been awarded in accordance with UGC (Minimum standards and procedure for award of .Phil., / Ph.D. degree regulation 2009 or 2016 and their amendments from time to time. Prescribing new conditions for Pre 2009 Ph.D. holders to become eligible for appointment is highly unreasonable and impracticable. Hence, AIFUCTO urges the UGC to make necessary changes in the Regulation, 2018 to the effect that all the Ph.D. holders who have registered / awarded Ph.D. degree prior to the adoption of 2009 Regulations by the respective universities be made eligible to be appointed as Assistant Professors. Otherwise there will be lot of confusions and create unnecessary fear among the Ph.D. holders in respect of their degrees eligibility to be appointed in Universities and Colleges. Similar changes should also be made in respect of Librarians and Director of Physical Education appointment qualification.
Even in the 2006 pay revision, the pay scales of Assistant Professors were disproportionately lower when compared to other grades. Adding fuel to the fire, MHRD notification dt.02.11.2017 prescribed very low pay scales for AGP 6000, AGP 7000 and AGP 8000 categories. As per the notification when an Assistant Professor in the AGP 7000 (Level 11) moves to AGP 8000 (Level 12), adding (5+1) increments one reaches a level higher than the minimum pay of Rs.79,800/- fixed for AGP 8000 (Level 12). The teacher does not get any hike when he moves to Level 12 after spending 9 years with Ph.D., 10 years with M.Phil., or 11 years with NET / SLET. Similar is the case when a teacher moves from AGP 6000 (Level 10) to AGP 7000 (Level 11). While fixing the entry pay, in contrast of the scales of Central Government employees, where a minimum pay has been prescribed for each GP, no minimum pay has been prescribed for College / University Teachers. Worse, even the minimum pay Rs.31,890/- (Rs.23,890/- for Reader / LSG + AGP 8000) fixed for AGP 8000/-. Teachers in the last pay revision as per the notification of MHRD 1-36/2009-U-II, dt.26.08.2010, has not been taken into account while fixing entry pay of AGP 8000 (Level 12) Teachers. The decision of no separate minimum for AGP 7000 and AGP 8000 Teachers and the decision of ignoring MHRD notification dt.26.08.2010 cumulatively minimized the pay of the Assistant Professors in all the three levels 10, 11 & 12. Adopting simply the pay matrices applicable for other Government employees goes against the policy decision of Government of India to fix higher scales to teachers than the employees, taken as early as in 1986 revision.
Moreover, comparing the pay scales of Colleges / Universities with IIT / IIM scales, discrimination is shown in the AGP 8000 (Level 12) Teachers fixing Rs.1,01,500/- for IIT / IIM and Rs.79,800/- for College / University Teachers. This is a great injustice done to the Teachers belonging to Level 12 considering their length of service and qualification.
Hence, AIFUCTO urges the UGC to hold discussion with AIFUCTO to rectify these serious anomalies.
While welcoming the restoring of M.Phil. / Ph.D incentives through the Regulations, 2018, restricting the quantum to the entry level pay is not acceptable to AIFUCTO. Hence, AIFUCTO urges the UGC to remove the restriction clause.
Further a clarification be issued to the effect that the restoration of incentive benefit is applicable with effect from 01.01.2016 itself.
Prof. V.S. Chauhan Committee recommended one orientation course (21 days) and one refresher course of 5 days duration for CAS from level 10 to Level 11. But the Regulation, 2018 increased the refresher course to 2 courses of 5 days duration. In effect, one has to undergo three courses within four years of his appointment. Moreover, exemption from one refresher course for Ph.D holder clause is removed.
Similarly for CAS from Level 11 to Level 12, the Committee recommended only one course of 5 days duration. But, the Regulation, 2018 makes it to four courses of 5 days duration or two courses of 10 days duration. For CAS from Level11 to Level 12 as against the recommendation of one refresher course of 5 days duration, the Regulation, 2018, modified it to two programmes of 5 days each or one programme of 10 days duration.
As a whole, a teacher has to undergo one orientation course (21 days) and 8 one week courses (or) one OC and 4 two week refresher courses, during his / her promotion to Associate Professor.
The completion of too many courses within a fixed period will be impracticable and also it is very difficult for the Universities to conduct required number of courses in different subjects. The welcome change of reduction of duration of the courses has been nullified by the increase in number of courses.
Hence, AIFUCTO urges the UGC to reduce the number of courses to the level of PRC recommendation to make it practicable.
Regulation, 2018, has proposed a new scheme of performance assessment and evaluation system in the place of API based PBAS. As per the new assessment scheme, the activities are divided into teaching, involvement in the University / College student related activities / research activities. Emphasis is laid on research for University Teachers. During CAS promotions, the teachers are to be classified as
good, satisfactory and not satisfactory. The Teachers with good or satisfactory performance are eligible for CAS with a specific recommendation by the relevant screening cum evaluation / selection committee. The scheme prescribed 80% and above class room teaching for “Good” and 70% to 80% class room teaching for “Satisfactory” grading and three student related activities. For University Teachers, this scheme prescribed research scores for research papers, books, research projects, etc. For Librarians and DPES, the scheme prescribed 90% and above attendance for “Good” and 80 - 90” for “Satisfactory” grading.
The most disturbing provision is that the CAS promotion to Associate Professor will be done by selection committees prescribed for Direct Recruitment.
AIFUCTO of the strong view that “Selection” in respect of CAS promotion to Associate Professor and Associate Professor to Professor will lead to lot of discrimination in granting CAS to eligible teachers. Particularly in aided / private institutions the degree of discrimination will be more leading to chaos in the campuses of Higher Educational Institutions. During one’s career he / she has to appear before screening cum evaluation / selection committee for 4 or more times. After serving for so many years as Teacher in the particular discipline and appearing before the committees repeatedly as if he / she is new to the subject and the field is not acceptable to AIFUCTO.
Hence, AIFUCTO urges the UGC to make suitable amendments in the Regulation, 2018, to grant CAS on the basis of the self - appraisal report submitted by the individual teacher on the basis of broad assessment criteria in every stage. This is the only viable and reasonable mode for CAS promotions.
In the Regulation 2018, promotion criteria under CAS for University Teachers has been made more research oriented while in the case of college teachers, CAS criteria is more focused on teaching.
In contrary to the above said principle, for professorship in colleges, the CAS criteria are identical with the CAS criteria for University Teachers which include 10 research publications in peer reviewed / UGC listed journals and a minimum of 110 Research score. This is against the accepted principle of two different CAS criteria for University and College Teachers in accordance with the nature of work. Hence, AIFUCTO urges the UGC to modify this particular clause for College Teachers, removing the research component so that College Teachers will be able to get the professorship after spending required number of years of service.
While welcoming the granting of professorship for those Associate Professors who have completed three years as Associate Professor, a special clause is need to be added in respect of incumbent Associate Professors. There are several Associate Professors who have completed 3 or more years of Associate Professorship on 01.01.2016 itself. Hence, a special clause be added to the effect that all the incumbent Associate Professors who have completed three years as Associate Professor as on 01.01.2016 shall be placed in academic level 14 and shall be re-designated as Professor on 01.01.2016 itself. This clause is very much necessary to grant professorship to incumbent Associate Professors without any encumbrance.
In section 3.11 of the Regulations, 2018, a clause should be included to count the research period as service period, for those, who pursue research degree under Faculty Improvement programme.
AIFUCTO has been repeatedly demanding the inclusion of pay scales for Tutors / Demonstrators, Coaches, accompanists etc. But to our dismay, the Regulation is silent on the pay scales of the above said categories. AIFUCTO urges the UGC to prescribe corresponding pay scales for Tutors / Demonstrators, Coaches and accompanies.
AIFUCTO has been highlighting the plight of the fully qualified and experienced Teachers working in self - financed / unaided institutions and Guest Lecturers. Though they are in possession of the required qualification as per UGC norms and doing the jobs of UGC governed teachers, not only their position is ad-hoc but also they are paid very meagre salary. The landmark judgements of the Hon’ble SC / Allahabad HC / Patna HC are in favour of justice to them. The constitutional obligation of the Central Government is strengthened by the following clauses of the landmark order, dated 05.01.2017 of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Civil Appeal Nos.115 -116 of 2017, in the matter of regulation of salary disbursal system for teaching and non-teaching staff of unaided colleges.
“51. The expression ‘Education’ occurring under Entry 25 of List III to the Seventh Schedule of the Constitution takes within its sweep the authority to legislate with respect to every aspect of education including establishment and administration of educational institutions such as schools, colleges, etc. Administration of an educational institution has mainly two facets (i) imparting of knowledge and (ii) maintaining the necessary infrastructure for providing the venue and other facilities for imparting knowledge. To perform the twin functions, man power is required. Such man power consists of two classes of persons, teaching staff and non-teaching staff.
The Hon’ble Supreme Court has ruled in para 89 of this judgement that the management (of the unaided college) will bear the financial obligation to pay the revised pay scales of the staff. At the same time, the power to regulate the said mechanism will be that of the Government (Union / State).
“52. Therefore entry 25 must necessarily take within its sweep inter-alia the power to regulate the activity of employment by educational institutions, whether they are established by the state, or its instrumentalities or non-state actors.
53. In view of the fact that entry 25 occurs in the concurrent list of the seventh schedule, both the Parliament and State Legislatures are competent to make laws regulating inter-alia the establishment and administration of colleges either by the Governments (Union or State) or their instrumentalists or by non-state actors (Private Sectors)”.
In view of the above SC order, AIFUCTO demand
i) Issuance of a clear declaration that the 7 th UGC pay revision scheme is also applicable to unaided institutions.
i) Well - regulated salary scheme for disbursement of salaries through the managements of unaided Institutions as per para 89 of Hon’ble SC order in CA 115 - 116 of 2017.
The pay matrix at all levels from Associate Professors end abruptly in a manner that amounts to stagnation at these levels very soon, may be as early as 2020. As per the notification, Associate Professors and Professors stagnate at 18 th and 15 th stage respectively. There is every possibility that Associate Professors and Professors stagnate within 4 or 5 years. AIFUCTO urges to modify the pay matrix suitably to avoid stagnation.
The rectification of anomalies consequent to the pay revision is equally important as pay revision. Many anomalies arose during 1996 and 2006 pay revisions have not been rectified so far leading to differentiation of pay between individual teachers. AIFUCTO in its representation to PRC elaborately explained the anomalies with many illustrations. In fact the committee specifically appreciated AIFUCTO for this particular elaboration during our discussion on 21.09.2016. But, the regulation has not addressed this issue. AIFUCTO urges the UGC to address this issue and rectify the 1996 and 2006 pay revision anomalies.
Point 18 of the MHRD notification, dt.02.11.2017, categorically suggests that the revised pay of Teachers in the colleges and the Universities is subject to the guidelines issued by the Ministry of Finance (Dept. of Expenditure) vide OM No.1/1/2016-E.III (A), dt.13.01.2017. The said OM underlines the fact that the Central universities are “autonomous institutions” and hence are supposed to get only 70% of the enhanced financial burden on account of the pay revision, the rest to be met by the Universities through self - generation of resources. This is part of a policy assault launched by the Government to withdraw funding from Higher Education and also to starve Universities into penury and extinction.
AIFUCTO strongly urges the UGC to restore 100% assistance to Central Universities.
The scheme of CAS from Sr. Asst. Prof. (Level 11) to SG. Asst. Professor (Level 12) requires uniformly 5 years. This clause denies the service benefits of the teachers who acquire Ph.D. / M.Phil. during this period. Also it prevents the teachers from counting total number of years for their CAS.
Hence, AIFUCTO urges the UGC to include a provision similar to one existing in 1986 and 1996 pay revisions. The relevant provision reads as follows:
“If the number of years required in a feeder cadre are less than those proposed above, thus entailing hardship to those who have completed more than the total number of years in their entire service for eligibility in the cadre should be placed in the next higher cadre after adjusting the total number of years.
AIFUCTO of the strong view that total parity should be maintained between Teachers, Librarians and Directors of Physical Education in all respects.
The non-compliance of the roster system or attempts to circumvent it by the educational institutions / Universities require timely intervention by the UGC. AIFUCTO urges the UGC to make necessary rules to ensure the adherence of rules relating to the appointment from socially challenged sections by the Universities / Educational Institutions.
In the 6 th Pay Commission implemented with effect from 01.01.2006, the 3 rd promotion to Associate Professor in Pay Band 4 was implemented. But this 3 rd promotion has not been given effect properly to the pensioners due to the absence of Lecturer, Lecturer (SS), Lecturer (SG), designations prior to 1986, (prior to 1986 the designation was Assistant Professor) negating the very essence of the Nakara
Hence, AIFUCTO urges that all Teachers irrespective of their designation with 19 years of service (16 for LSG + 3 for Associate Professor) with 3 years reduction for Ph.D. and one year reduction for M.Phil. (or) Rs.4075/- (Rs.3700 + 3 increments) whichever is earlier be given the minimum of the PB - 4 in 2006 pay revision. The pension should be fixed accordingly.
The pension for those who retired during 5 th pay revision be fixed at the minimum of PB - 4 if they got Rs.13,260/- (12000 + 3 increments) or completed 14 (11+3) years of service with a reduction of 2 years for Ph.D. and one year for M.Phil.
Similarly for those, who retired during 4 th and 3 rd pay revisions, the pension should be fixed at the minimum of PB - 4 based on the required number of years of service.
In view of the granting of Professorship, the pension for those who retired with 15 years of service with Ph.D. (9+3+3), 16 years service with M.Phil. (10+3+3) and 17 years of service (11+3+3) with NET / SLET be fixed at the 50% of the minimum of Level 14.
We hope UGC and the Anomaly Committee will appreciate our presentation as it relates to pay revision, appointments, promotion, other service conditions in respect of University and College Teachers, Librarians and Physical Education Directors. We expect the Anomaly Committee’s early invitation to AIFUCTO for further deliberations and resolution of issues before finalizing the Anomaly Committee report.