The Nagaland NET Qualified Forum (NNQF) has called for modifying the rules pertaining to the 40% weightage given to academic marks in the Common Educational Service Examination (CESE) and including MPhil/PhD academic publications in peer-reviewed journals and teaching experience as part of academic performance.
In an open letter to Higher Education minister Temjen Imna Along, the forum claimed that the 40% weightage given to academic marks had put many candidates at a disadvantage, particularly those from the annual system and who were on the verge of becoming overage with regard to CESE conducted by the Nagaland Public Service Commission (NPSC).
It pointed out that this group was at a disadvantage from various viewpoints. Firstly, the group had been denied the right to equal opportunity for all those years when many posts were not advertised and recruitment took place through other channels other than the CESE. Secondly, when this group competed with younger batches of the semester system, it already behind based on the scoring differences between the annual and the semester system.
Thirdly, the forum that many universities/colleges might not be as generous as others in terms of marking despite the good quality education imparted and their high status in institutions across the country.
This had put students from good institutions with a lesser scoring range at a disadvantage as well. Thus, the forum said the 40% mark weightage on academic marks did not aid to the open and fair aspect of the exam.
Further, NNQF alleged that the current mark distribution system left out points that could be scored by candidates who were actively engaged with the academia post attainment of their Master’s degree. It pointed out that a vast assortment of accomplishments such as the conferment of MPhil/PhD degree, publication of research papers in peer reviewed journals, having teaching experience, etc, that were pertinent to teaching in higher education were being presently excluded from the points scored in academic performance. This left candidates who were committed and dedicated to the academia at a very severe disadvantage.
Claiming that it had been appealing to departments concerned for a revision of the recruitment criteria (the 40% weightage on academic marks), the NNQF urged Along to consider the issue and intervene for a more egalitarian approach towards the CESE.
The NNQF stated that some appointments that had not gone through the CESE were being challenged in courts. Based on the office memorandum (no. AR-5/ASSO/98, dated June 6th, 2016), appointments on contractual basis were banned. However, the contractual appointments continued to take place.
The forum reminded the minister that the Gauhati High Court, Kohima Bench had in its August 3, 2018 order in the case filed by ACAUT and PSAN against backdoor appointments stated that “any appointment without advertisement and the regularization of (such posts) is not only unconstitutional but null and void.”
Similarly, it said the Supreme Court in the Uma Devi case in 2006 had clarified that regularisation could not be a mode of appointment. It also mentioned that when a temporary/ad-hoc/contractual post continued for long, it presumed the need and warrant for a regular posts through procedures of direct recruitment.
At the backdrop of all these orders, the forum said regularisation of the contractual posts would only be a reflection of disrespect to the existing law and a further violation of the rights of aspirants and equality. It thus hoped that the regularization of such appointments did not take place.