Anna University’s condition for promotion of professors binned by Madras HC A 2018 rule says guiding PhD candidate mandatory to be eligible for promotion. Vpj
MARKET BSE NSE
Home Cities Chennai
Anna University’s condition for promotion of professors binned by Madras HC
A 2018 rule says guiding PhD candidate mandatory to be eligible for promotion
Published: 28th March 2021 05:47 AM | Last Updated: 28th March 2021 05:47 AM | A+A A-
Madras High Court Madras High Court (File photo | EPS)
By Express News Service
CHENNAI: Stressing that the rules of the game cannot be changed after the selection was over, Madras High Court has set aside the new conditions brought in by Anna University to accord promotion to serving associate professors and assistant professors. Quashing the new condition that an associate professor must have guided a PhD candidate to become eligible for promotion, the court directed the university to provide promotion in all such cases as per existing rules.
Justice V Parthiban set aside the resolutions that were passed by the University in 2018 while disposing of a batch of 13 writ petitions challenging the same. Appearing for the petitioners, senior advocate Isaac Mohanlal argued that the faculty members were fully eligible for consideration in terms of the Career Advancement Scheme (CAS) for promotion from the post of Assistant Professor to Associate Professor or from the post of Associate Professor to Professor.
Justice V Parthiban, in his order, held that the rules of the game cannot be changed after the selection was over. The court further held that research guidance was one of the components under the Academic Performance Indicator (API) score, which was exempted by the AICTE and followed by the State government as well as the University itself for the relevant period in its notification calling for applications.
The judge observed, “Without any uniform benchmark put in place, promotions cannot be allowed to capriciously depend on the opinion formation viz. subjective satisfaction of the committee members, giving room for the personal preferences and predilection of the members in rejecting or clearing the candidate.”
ADVERTISEMENT
“This court is unable to appreciate as to how the interview committee can allow and disallow the candidates without evolving any particular benchmark under the pretext of the so-called subjective satisfaction,” he added. The judge then directed the University to pass appropriate orders within four weeks by granting promotions to the writ petitioners, as per their entitlement.
For petner isac mohan lal argued
