'Period Spent By Teacher To Pursue PhD Can Be Counted As Teaching Experience' : Kerala High Court Allows Priya Varghese's Appeal

The Kerala High Court on Thursday set aside the order of the Single Judge that directed the Kannur University to re-examine the credentials of Priya Varghese to be appointed as Associate Professor at Kannur University. Priya Varghese is the wife of K.K. Ragesh, private secretary to Chief Minister Pinarayi Vijayan.

In November 2022, a Single Bench of Justice Devan Ramachandran had held that Priya Varghese did not possess the requisite teaching experience, to be appointed as Associate Professor at the Department of Malayalam at Kannur University and directed the competent authority of the University to reconsider her credentials and decide whether she should continue on the Rank List. Dr.Joseph Skariah, who was ranked after Varghese in the Rank List, had filed the writ petition challenging the inclusion of Varghese in the List stating that she was not qualified for the post of Associate Professor as she did not have the prescribed 8 years of teaching experience prescribed.

In an appeal by Priya Varghese, a division bench of Justice A K Jayasankaran Nambiar and Justice Mohammed Nias C P set aside the order of the single bench and held that the period spent by Priya Varghese on pursuing her Ph.D. degree under the Faculty Development Programme could not be excluded while considering the period of teaching experience.  Regulation 3.11 of the UGC Regulations, 2018 was the relevant provision here, which reads as :

"The time taken by candidates to acquire M.Phil. and/or Ph.D. Degree shall not be considered as teaching/research experience to be claimed for appointment to the teaching positions. Further the period of active service spent on pursuing Research Degree simultaneously with teaching assignment without taking any kind of leave, shall be counted as teaching experience for the purpose of direct recruitment/promotion. Regular faculty members upto twenty percent of the total faculty strength (excluding faculty on medical/maternity leave) shall be allowed by their respective institutions to take study leave for pursuing Ph.D. degree. (emphasis supplied)”.

Interpreting this provision, the division bench held that the Ph.D period of candidates who are not at faculty members will be excluded from teaching experience. However, if the research degree is pursued by regular faculty members simultaneous with the teaching assignment, then the period will be counted as teaching experience.

The Court observed that:

“The prohibition against inclusion of the time taken for acquiring a Ph.D. degree in the computation of teaching/research experience is one that applies to ‘candidates’ by which term is intended a person who is not working as a teacher in any institution at the time of applying for the teaching post in question. ‘Faculty members’, on the other hand, refers to persons who are already working as teachers in an institution at the time of applying for the teaching post in question, and for them, the period spent on pursuing a research degree simultaneously with teaching assignment and without taking any kind of leave, will count towards teaching experience. 

In other words, merely on account of their having pursued a research degree simultaneous with their teaching assignment, their research period will not be excluded. Similarly, even those regular faculty members, upto 20% of the total faculty strength, who have availed study leave to pursue the Ph.D. programme under the Faculty Development Programme, will get the benefit of including the period spent on pursuing a research degree in the teaching/research experience stipulated for the teaching post that is notified for appointment.

The division bench noted that during the said period, the appellant was having service lien at the Assistant Professor post at Sree Vivekananda College Kunnamkulam. 

Decision of the Single Bench

Single Judge held that the experience gained by Varghese while on deputation under the Faculty Development Programme at Kannur University, and as Director of Student Services at the Kannur University, could not be treated as teaching/research experience for the purposes of Regulation 4.1.II of the UGC Regulations, 2018. Based on this finding, the University was asked to reconsider her eligibility to the post.

Writ Petition Was Bad For Non-Joinder of Parties

The Counsel for Varghese argued that the writ petition was bad for non-joinder of necessary parties. It was argued that Rank List was published by Kannur University which was not a party to the petition. The Single Judge had issued directions to the University for compliance, without making it a party, it was contended.

The Counsel for Dr. Joseph Skariah argued that the Registrar of the University was made a party to the petition and as per Section 14 of the Kannur University Act, 1996, Suits by or against the University are to be instituted by or against the Registrar.

However, the Court held that the Writ Petition was bad for non-joinder of parties observing as below:

“the provisions of Section 3 of the same Act that declares the University to be an independent body with perpetual succession and a common seal that can sue and be sued in its own name. The statutory provisions leave us with no manner of doubt that what is envisaged therein is that any suit or like proceedings initiated against the University be done in the name of the University, represented by its Registrar.”

Research Period Spent On Pursuing Ph.D. Degree Under Faculty Development Programme Cannot Be Excluded While Reckoning Teaching/Research Experience

The Single Judge had held that period spent by Varghese undergoing the Faculty Development Programme of the Kannur University could not be included towards the research appointment to the post. The Single Judge also held that the period spent while on deputation as Director of Student Services of the Kannur University could not be counted as teaching experience.

The Division Bench however, was of the view that under the Indian model of Higher Education regulated by the UGC, research and community outreach programmes are recognised as integral aspects of pedagogy. The Court referred to the Humboldtian model of Higher education which places emphasis on the close integration of teaching and research. “Under the said model, Professors are not only responsible for imparting knowledge to students but also engage in original research contributing to the advancement of knowledge", the Court observed.

The Court was of the view that some aspects of Humboldtian model can be found in the standards laid down by the UGC in India. “The UGC Regulations, 2018, that have been adopted by the State Government and therefore apply to the Kannur University contain many provisions that indicate the extent to which research work is encouraged among the teaching community.” The Court observed.

“The provisions therefore clearly reveal a scheme of promotion of research among faculty members that the University/College/Institution then seeks to take advantage of by demanding the continued service of the teacher concerned. The Faculty Improvement Scheme, and the Faculty Development Scheme that replaced it, both notified by the UGC, contain the procedure to be followed for selecting upto 20% of the regular faculty of an institution for the conferment of research opportunities under the scheme. The said schemes and Regulations therefore effectively complement each other. “The Court held.

In light of the same the Court concluded that the period spent on pursuing a Ph.D. degree under the Faculty Development Programme cannot be excluded while reckoning her teaching/research experience in the post of Assistant Professor.

Period Spent While On Deputation As Director Of Student Services Of The Kannur University To Be Counted Towards Teaching Experience

The Division bench held that the period spent by Varghese on deputation as Director of Student Services/ National Service Scheme (NSS), was to be counted as teaching experience by the University.

“In our view, the answer to the question as to whether or not the experience gained by a teacher, while on deputation to a non-teaching post, qualifies as teaching experience must depend upon the nature of activities undertaken by the teacher in the post to which she is deputed and not merely by the classification – as teaching or non-teaching – accorded to the post.” The Court observed.

The Court noted that the scope of the phrase ‘teaching experience’ is to be determined through an understanding of the nature and scope of the word ‘teaching’ or ‘pedagogy’ itself. “Changing conceptions of learning bring along corresponding changes in the conception of teaching”, the Court said.

“..It was also sensing the need for a responsible person such as a teacher to occupy the post of Programme Coordinator of NSS that the recruitment rule for the post prescribes that an aspirant to the post has to have teaching experience. Thus, merely because the post of Director of Student Services/Programme Coordinator of NSS is classified as a non-teaching post in the recruitment rules of the University, it does not follow that the incumbent in the post does not gain ‘teaching experience’ in the broader sense of the term.”

The Court also agreed with the submission of the Government Pleader that “a finding that the experience of a teacher in the post of Director of Student Services/Programme Coordinator of NSS is not teaching experience, would have disastrous consequences for the academic community in the State as no teacher would be willing to go on deputation to such posts for fear of losing out on career progression.”

Can The Period Spent As Lecturer At Teacher Education Centre At Kannur University On Ad Hoc/Contract Basis Be Counted Towards The Teaching Experience?

The Court noted that Varghese had cited two spells of service as Lecturer at the Teacher Education Centre, Kannur University, on ad hoc/contract basis as teaching experience for consideration to the post. The Single Judge had held that these spells of service could not be considered valid teaching experience since they were rendered many years prior to the application and since the service was rendered as a ‘Lecturer’ and not as an ‘Assistant Professor’. The Division Bench disagreed with this view of the Single bench and held:

“On a perusal of Ext.P2 notification, as well as the UGC Regulations, 2018, we do not find any prescription therein that suggests that the qualifying experience must be one that is attained proximate in point of time with the date of preferring an application seeking consideration for appointment to the post of Associate Professor. In its absence, it was not for this Court to introduce a requirement in the notification or the Regulations, which the academic policy makers did not deem necessary. That apart, the nomenclature of ‘Assistant Professor’ was one that was introduced in later UGC Regulations to denote the entry level teaching post in a University, which was earlier known as ‘Lecturer’. Thus, the post of Lecturer was merely re-designated as Assistant Professor and there was no qualitative change in the nature of duties attached to the post.”

The Court examined whether Varghese possessed the necessary qualifications stipulated for an Assistant Professor under the UGC Regulations, 2018 at the time when she rendered her service as Lecturer at the Teacher Education Centre, Kannur University, on ad hoc/contract basis. The Court found that her first spell of 8 months in service was prior to her attaining the NET qualification and hence those 8 months could not be counted as experience for the post.

The Court thus directed that the candidature of Priya Varghese be considered in light of the above observations.

“We declare that the appellant Mrs. Priya Varghese is entitled to:
(i) Reckon the period spent by her on research under the Faculty Development Programme of the Kannur University towards the research experience stipulated under Ext.P2 notification read with the UGC Regulations of 2018;

(ii) Reckon the period spent by her on deputation as Director of Student Services/Programme Coordinator of NSS of the Kannur University, towards the teaching experience required for appointment as an Associate Professor pursuant to Ext.P2 notification;

(iii) Reckon the second spell of 8 months and 24 days from 05.06.2002 to 28.02.2003, spent by her as Lecturer at the Teacher Education Centre at Kannur University on ad hoc/contract basis towards the teaching experience as Assistant Professor required for appointment as an Associate Professor pursuant to Ext. P2 notification; “

The Court held that her candidature for the post of Associate Professor shall be considered accordingly.

Senior Advocate Ranjith Thampan instructed by Adv.Sri.K.S.Arun Kumar appeared for the appellant; Senior Advocate George Poonthottam assisted by Adv.Sri.Santharam P. appeared on behalf of the 1st respondent/writ petitioner; Senior Advocate P Ravindran, assisted by Adv.IV Pramod appeared for the University Registrar; Senior Advocate Dr S Gopakumaran Nair appeared for the Chancellor; Adv S Krishnamoorthy appeared for the UGC and Government Pleader TB Hood appeared for the State.

Case Title: Priya Varghese V Dr. Joseph Skariah

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Ker) 284

Click here to read/download judgment