Kannur University Case| Priya Varghese Appeals Against Decision Of Single Judge

Priya Varghese, the wife of K.K. Ragesh, private secretary to Chief Minister Pinarayi Vijayan, has moved the Kerala High Court challenging the Single Bench decision which directed the  competent authority of the University to reconsider her credential, and decide whether she ought to continue in the rank list for appointment. 

The Single Judge Bench of Justice Devan Ramachandran had passed the impugned order on November 17, 2022. 

"Teaching experience can only be a real fact and not a fiction or an inference. To paraphrase, unless a candidate is able to show real experience in teaching as required by the UGC Regulations 2018, he or she could not have had their applications approved by the scrutiny committee of the University, which is also a statutory one. In the case at hand, the scrutiny committee proceeded on certain assumptions that they thought to be true, particularly with respect to the periods of service claimed by the 5th respondent while engaged in full-time research and discharging duties as Director of Student Services and coordinator of the National Services Scheme. Certainly, such activities would go to the promotion of the growth of a person as a good teacher, but that by itself would not be sufficient in the absence of the requisite experience of teaching. What is required is a felicitous mix of both, so that a teacher is able to guide his or her students", the Court had observed while passing the said order. 

In the appeal moved, it has been argued by Varghese that she satisfies the qualifications laid down in UGC regulations Clause 4.1.II for the post of Associate Professor. It has been averred that she has a total of 11 years and 20 days teaching and/or research experience in an Academic or research position equivalent to that of Assistant Professor in a college. 

It has been averred that the Single Judge had erred in holding that the period undergone by the Appellant under the Faculty Development Program as well as the period of deputation as Director of student services could not be counted as qualifying teaching/research experience.  It was contended that the finding of the Single Judge that the Faculty Development Program could have been undergone along with the regular teaching assignment is also incorrect. She pointed out that the said period had been taken into account as qualifying service for promotion to the higher post of Associate Professor and Professor in the CAS promotion. The Single Judge had however taken the view that while the period could be counted for career advancement scheme (CAS) promotion, it could not be taken as 'qualifying service' for direct recruitment as 'experience of teaching'. 

She further pointed out that the Single Judge had also erred in not taking into account the period of the Appellant's experience as Lecturer in B.Ed. College, Kannur, as not amounting to teaching experience.

"The learned Single Judge ought to have seen that the qualification of the candidates is being determined by a screening committee as stipulated under the UGC Regulations", the appellant avers while pointing out that in the writ petition neither the screening committee nor the University had been made parties. 

It was further averred that the Single Judge had erred in not taking into account her period of deputation as Director of student services. 

"The learned Single Judge misdirected himself in holding that teaching would be limited to the four walls of a classroom. Hence, the learned Single Judge ought to have found that the period undergone by the appellant as Director of Student Services had to be counted as teaching experience, especially since in view of the settled position of this Hon'ble Court that even sports coach will answer the definition of teacher since he is imparting instructions", the appellant averred. 

Case Title: Priya Varghese v. Joseph Skariah & Ors.