A case of the authorities of two Agricultural Universities of the State taking certain decisions arbitrarily has come to light. Both of them are sticking to the old statutes, and would not want to keep pace with revised rules and procedures adopted by the UGC for all professional as well as non-professional universities and institutions in the country. Why is there a deliberate attempt of not revising the old statutes when there are clear instructions from the UGC and the Governor, who is also the Chancellor of the two Universities by virtue of his constitutional position? The old statutes did not provide for incorporating Krishi Vigyan Kendras (KVK) in University Statutes. But the revised UGC statutes for the Agricultural Universities in the country including the two in our state provide for this incorporation and we have as many as 16 such centers functioning in Jammu and Kashmir at the moment.
SKUAST, the premier institution was governed by UGC statutes at the time of its inception in J&K in 1984. This statute governed the salary system of the teaching and technical staff. In 2009, new pay scales came into being as per the recommendations of the 6th UGC Pay Commission approved by the Governor in his capacity as the Chancellor of the two universities. The 6th UGC Pay Commission also laid down the new set of rules that would govern fresh appointments and promotion of existing teaching staff in the universities. But surprisingly, both of these universities did not revise their statutes so as to incorporate the recommendations of the 6th UGC Pay Commission for new appointments and promotions. They must have some reason for not doing so. The revised pay structure is strictly based on the grade to grade revision as prescribed in the Union Ministry notifications. The placement of the incumbents in the higher posts carrying higher grade pays or in the same band with higher academic grade pays on or after January 1, 2006, however, shall be strictly governed by the clause 2 under the captioned- Revised pay scales, Service Conditions and CAS for teachers and equivalent positions and other relevant guidelines of the MHRD. The curious thing is that while the two universities adopted the new UGC guidelines, they continue to make appointment in the scales prescribe by the 5th Pay Commission UGC rules of 1988. Career Advancement Scheme (CAS) that should have been discarded after the adoption of 6th Pay Commission guidelines continues to be observed in the case of fresh appointments and promotions in these two universities. New posts are advertised with the same, viz. 5th Pay Commission scale. This seems as on attempt of denying the deserving candidates what the rules allow them without fear or favour.
We are not disposed to bring any particular accusations against the authorities of the two universities under discussion. Once the recommendations of the 6th Pay Commission have been accepted, the acceptance has to be in totality and not in piecemeal approach. Partial implementation of UGC guidelines and refusal to revise the University Statute to conform to the latest guidelines is clear defiance of policy planning mechanism in the country.
Follow our WhatsApp channel