Guest Column | Teachers’ never-ending wait for revised UGC regulations

The rationale of the March 22 notification of the Union Territory of Chandigarh Employees Rules is to put an end to the present arrangement in Chandigarh where one section of teachers follows one set of rules, and the other a different set of rules

The government of India, in its March 2022 notification of the Union Territory of Chandigarh Employees (Conditions of Service) Rules, sought to bring teachers working at higher educational institutions in Chandigarh under ‘the conditions of service, including pay scales’, as per regulations framed by their respective national higher education regulatory bodies, such as the University Grants Commission (UGC) or the All India Council for Technical Education (AICTE), as the case may be.

Clearly, the intention of the GoI is to have a uniform system in Chandigarh that is followed on national-level. (HT File)

Clearly, the intention of the GoI is to have a uniform system in Chandigarh that is followed on national-level. It has been four months but the faculty at higher educational institutions in Chandigarh, including Panjab University (PU), local government and aided colleges, are still awaiting orders to implement the revised regulations. Unfortunately, teachers are the only cadre of employees still awaiting pay-scale revision since 2016.

After the notification and home minister Amit Shah’s unambiguous announcement that teachers of all higher educational institutions in Chandigarh will retire at 65 as per the revised UGC regulations, it was expected that PU and its affiliated colleges would soon follow the new rules and regulations, but to no avail.

Apart from the undue delay in implementing revised UGC regulations, a worrisome misconception has crept among certain sections that the notification in its present form does not apply to PU and government-aided colleges in Chandigarh.

Teachers versus civil servants

Significantly, this notification, for the first time distinguishes the separate nature of ‘conditions of service and pay scales’ of teachers in higher educational institutions in Chandigarh from those of civil servants and mentions them accordingly in the notification itself.

The rationale behind this notification is to put an end to the present arrangement in Chandigarh where one section of teachers follows one set of rules, and the other a different set of rules.

Such a view also negates the impression that the notification only applies to all such posts of teachers who are under ‘administrative control’ of the Chandigarh administration as the part of the notification that deals with teachers at higher educational institutions should be read separately from the part that is applicable to civil servants.

Already, this misconceived equivalence of civil servants with college teachers was responsible for teachers superannuating at the age of 58, the same as civil servants, for decades together, though the UGC-mandated age of superannuation for teachers was 60 at the time. Also, the observation from certain quarters that teachers of local government-aided colleges are not under ‘administrative control’ of the Chandigarh administration is unfounded. In fact, they are under the overarching administrative and financial control of the administration.

Ambit of the notification

Moreover, the ambit of the notification includes ‘higher educational universities or institutions, which are governed by the UGC’ in Chandigarh. With PU being the only university in Chandigarh whose teachers are governed by UGC, teachers working in PU and its affiliated colleges in Chandigarh cannot be denied the benefits. Otherwise, the rules would have specifically mentioned that they are only applicable to government institutions of Chandigarh.

If, for the sake of argument, one were to accept that this notification in its present form is deficient, then, too, the application of UGC rules to all higher educational institutions in Chandigarh, as per different government of India, UGC regulations, instructions and directions that are issued from time to time cannot be ignored.

The GoI and UGC have always maintained that universities and colleges have to implement UGC schemes ‘in a composite manner’ and that the commission’s regulations are ‘mandatory’ in nature. What has led to this prevailing state of affairs is the selective and half-hearted application of UGC regulations in Chandigarh and it is this problem that the notification attempts to rectify.

It needs to be understood that just as the Punjab Civil Services Rules stand superseded in the case of government college teachers, PU Calendar Rules inconsistent with UGC regulations stand superseded in the case of PU and aided-college teachers, thereby bringing them all at par, as envisioned in UGC regulations and the 2022 notification.

No need to revisit PU’s status

As per the 2010 UGC regulations, the PU syndicate and senate (that enjoy delegated powers of the Parliament of India) did take the decision of amending the relevant university regulations raising the age of superannuation of teachers to 65 in 2011. But, the notification of the amendments by the GoI is still awaited because the Punjab government continues to hold up matters indefinitely. The notification of these amendments does not even require any change in the status of PU.

It would have been most desirable had teachers at PU and its affiliated colleges in Chandigarh and Punjab been covered under the revised UGC regulations, but since the Punjab government insists on being obstinate, it is felt that the teachers of PU and its affiliated colleges in Chandigarh should not be deprived of the benefits of UGC regulations as these institutions are situated in the UT, the legislative powers of which lie with the GoI and where the central government is by far the major or only contributor of funds.

But if the majority of teachers at UGC-governed institutions of higher education in Chandigarh are somehow denied the benefits of this notification, then it would be a grave injustice to these teachers, a complete misreading of the GoI notification, a violation of UGC regulations, and it would also falsify the welcome statement made by the home minister of India.

jagwant2008@gmail.com

(The writer is general secretary, Punjab Federation of University and College Teachers’ Organisation)