Hundreds of researchers and temporary teachers from many parts of India took to the streets on Thursday to oppose the HRD Ministry and UGCs withdrawal of NET exemption for MPhil/PhD degree holders. The protestors included researchers from JNU,DU,Kurukshetra University,Haryana,and universities of Maharashtra,among others; and they had assembled under the banner of the All-India Researchers Co-ordination Committee. The people gathered said that while the HRD Ministry could go ahead and withdraw the exemption given so far,they should not implement the guidelines retrospectively,making them valid from an earlier date. Otherwise,people who have already completed their research and are teaching in colleges will need to take NET exam again. Is it correct and just to penalise such research scholars,making them pay for whimsical policy changes affected by the mandarins of the Human Resource Development Ministry and University Grants Commission every now and then? Sandeep Singh,JNUSU president,said. K M Vats of the All-India Researchers Co-ordination Committee said the move would adversely affect the future of around 3 lakh researchers in India,while the retrospective implementation will take away the jobs of around 30,000 ad hoc teachers all over the country. The UGC has changed the guidelines on NET exemption many times before. The Commission introduced this criterion for the first time in 1991. After it was changed several times in between,in 2006,the UGC declared that the NET shall remain the compulsory requirement for appointment as lecturer for those with postgraduate degrees. However,candidates having a PhD degree in the concerned subject are exempt from the NET for PG and UG level teaching. Candidates having an MPhil degree in the concerned subject are exempted from the NET for UG-level teaching only. In June this year,the HRD Ministry removed the exemption. Interestingly,this move was made despite the UGCs own Act and constitution categorically stating that any new rule would come into effect prospectively,with a sufficient transition period and not retrospectively.
