IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

S.L.P. (CIVIL) No. 15816 OF 2023

In the matter of :

University Grants Commission ................Petitioner

Versus

Priya Varghese &Ors. ............Respondents

INDEX

S. NO. PARTICULAR PAGE NO.

1 Rejoinder affidavit on behalf of the Petitioner
to the counter affidavit filedon behalf of the
Respondent No.1

DRAWN BY : FILED BY:

(Manoj Ranjan Sinha &) ( )

Nisha Advocate for the petitioner
Advocates

DRAWN ON: .04.2024

FILED ON : .04.2024
 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

S.L.P. (CIVIL) No. 15816 OF 2023

In the matter of :

University Grants Commission ................Petitioner

Versus

Priya Varghese &Ors. ............Respondents

REJOINDER AFFIDAVIT ON BEHALF OF THE

PETITIONER TO THE COUNTER AFFIDAVIT FILED
ON BEHALF OF RESPONDENT NO.1

I, _________________, __________________, University

Grants Commission, Bahadur Shah Zafar Marg, New Delhi –
110002, do hereby solemnly affirm and declare as under : -

1. That I am working as _________________ in the University

Grants Commission [hereinafter referred to as “the UGC”]
herein and as such, I am conversant with the facts and
circumstances of the instant case and hence, am competent
to swear the instant affidavit.
2. That at the outset, it is respectfully submitted that the
contents of the counter affidavit filed on behalf of the
respondent no. 1 are incorrect and are not based on correct
facts. The petitioner denies each and every averment and
contention of the counter affidavit, except those which have
been admitted hereinafter and the contents of the Special
Leave Petition are reiterated in response.
3. The present Special Leave Petition is directed against the
impugned final judgment and order dated 22.06.2023 passed
 by the Hon'ble High Court of Kerala at Ernakulam in Writ
Appeal WA No. 27 of 2023 vide which the Hon'ble High
Court while allowing the Writ Appeal of the Appellant -
Respondent No. 1, set aside the judgment of the Ld. Single
Judge through which the Ld. Single Judge had issued a
direction to the competent authority of the University to re-
assess the credentials of the Respondent No. 1 herein and to
publish the final rank list accordingly. The Hon'ble High
Court, vide the impugned judgment and order found that the
writ petition was bad for non-joinder of parties and further
declared that the period spent by the Writ Appellant-
Respondent No. 1 on research under the Faculty
Development Programme of the Kannur University was to
be counted towards the 'research experience' of the Writ
Appellant for the purposes of appointment as Associate
Professor as stipulated under the UGC Regulations of 2018.
4. That respondent no. 1 has miserably failed to address the
issue raised by the petitioner regarding-whether respondent
no. 1 did her research work while pursuing her Ph.D.,
simultaneously with teaching assignment, without taking
any leave.
5. Section 3.11 of the UGC Regulations, 2018 clearly and in
an unambiguous manner states that the time taken to acquire
Ph.D. degree shall not be considered as research/teaching
experience, except if it is done simultaneously with teaching
assignment without taking any kind of leave. This has been
the norm for the Faculty Improvement Program as well as
for the Faculty Development Program under the Xth and
XIIth plans, respectively. The respondent no. 1 has failed to
demonstrate that her research/teaching experience was done
 along with teaching assignment as was stipulated under
Regulation 3.11 of the 2018 Regulations.
6. It is also submitted that the public notice issued by the UGC
in the year 2016 had been superseded by the 2018 UGC
Regulations.
7. It is respectfully stated and submitted that the UGC
Regulation 2018 prescribes the necessary qualifications for
appointmentto various posts of teachers including the post
of Associate Professor. Regulation4.1.1 stipulates as
follows:-

“4.0 Direct Recruitment

xxxx
II. Associate Professor:
Eligibility
i) A good academic record, with a Ph.D. Degree in the
concerned/allied/relevant disciplines.
ii) A Master‘s Degree with at least 55% marks (or an equivalent
grade in a point-scale, wherever the grading system is followed).
iii) A minimum of eight years of experience of teaching and / or
research in an academic/research position equivalent to that of
Assistant Professor in a University, College or Accredited
Research Institution/industry with a minimum of seven
publications in the peer-reviewed or UGC-listed journals and a
total research score of Seventy five (75) as per the criteria given
in Appendix II, Table 2.”

8. That,it is further respectfully stated and submitted that the

Kannur University, through its appointment/reappointment
notification dated 22.09.2021 (referenced as
B3/23389/2019), invited applications from candidates for
various teaching positions on a regular basis. Apart from
appointments to other posts, appointment to one post of
Associate Professor in the Department of Malayalam was
also mentioned. The notification dated 22.09.2021 itself
prescribed the eligibility qualifications in accordance with
the UGC regulations of 2018 for the said post. Respondent
 no.1, was not having the required minimum of eight years of
teaching experience as mandated.Regulation 3.11 of the
UGC Regulations 2018, clearly prescribed :
“3.11 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 per cent 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.

9. From the above, it is clearly made out that the time taken to
acquire PhD degree will not be counted as research/teaching
experience, except if it is done simultaneously with teaching
assignment without taking any kind of leave.

10. It is respectfully stated and submitted that as per Regulation

8.2.(X) of UGC Regulations 2018, study leave availed by
the candidate can only be counted as service for the purpose
of retirement benefits. The relevant extract reads as follows:
“X The period of study leave shall count as service for purpose of
the retirement benefits (pension/contributory provident fund),
provided that the teacher rejoins the University/College/Institution
on the expiry of his/her study leave, and serve the institution for the
period for which the Bond has been executed.”
11. It is respectfully stated and submitted that as per Regulation
4.1(II) of the 'UGC Regulations, 2018', the requirement of
'experience of teaching' refers to actual experience and not
that which can be construed or inferred, as the post of
Associate Professor holds extreme importance to both a
University and a College.
12. It is stated and submitted that the Hon'ble Supreme Court in
the case of Annamalai University vs. Secretary to
 Government, Information and Tourism Department and
Others, (2009) 4 SCC 590, have held that the provisions of
UGC Act are binding on all the Universities whether
conventional or open.

13. It is respectfully stated and submitted that the Hon'ble

Supreme Court in the case of Gambhirdan K. Gadhvi v.
State of Gujarat and Ors. [(2022) 5 SCC 179] have held :-
“16. It cannot be disputed that UGC Regulations are enacted by the
UGC in exercise of power under Section 26(1)(e) and 26(1)(g) of
UGC act, 1956. Even as per the UGC act every rule and regulation
made under that said Act, shall be laid before each House of
Parliament. Therefore, being a subordinate legislation, UGC
Regulation becomes part of the Act.”

14. It is further respectfully stated and submitted that,the UGC,

as the author of the regulations, has already established a
view and Respondent No. 1 cannot deviate from it or
contradict it. This is especially pertinent considering the
binding precedents set by this Hon'ble Court, which affirm
that UGC regulations take precedence over any conflicting
provisions in state statutes or legislation.
15. That the facts stated in the above affidavit are true to best of
my knowledge and have been derived from the records of
the case. No part of the same is false and nothing material
has been concealed therefrom.

DEPONENT

VERIFICATION
 I, the above named deponent, do hereby verify that the facts
stated in the above affidavit are true to my knowledge. No
part of the same is false and nothing material has been
concealed therefrom.

Verified at New Delhi on this the day of April, 2024.

DEPONENT

16.