Priya Varghese appointment: HC Division Bench sets aside the single judge’s directive to reconsider teaching credentials
[ad_1]
A Division Bench of the Kerala High Court on Thursday set aside a single judge’s verdict directing the Kannur University to reconsider the credentials of Priya Varghese —wife of K. K. Ragesh, Private secretary to Chief Minister Pinarayi Vijayan— by including her teaching experiences and decide whether she should continue in the rank list for the post of Malayalam Associate Professor in the university.
The single judge had passed the verdict after holding that she does not have the actual teaching experience for being included in the rank list.
Teaching experience
Allowing the appeal filed by Priya Varghese against the single judge’s verdict, the Bench comprising Justice A. K. Jayasankaran Nambiar and Justice Mohammed Nias C. P. declared that Priya Varghese is entitled to reckon the period spent by her on research under the Faculty Development Programme of the Kannur University as research experience and also the period spent by her on deputation as Director of Student Services/Programme Coordinator of NSS of the Kannur University as teaching experiences.
The court also held that she is also entitled to 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 as teaching experience as Assistant Professor. However, the court said that she cannot count her first spell of 8 months that was rendered prior to her attaining the NET qualification.
Weightage to University’s decision
The court said that 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 recruitment rule for the post prescribes that an aspirant to the post has to have teaching experience. When the University, which is an academic body, has chosen to treat the said experience of the teacher as ‘teaching experience’, then this court must defer to the wisdom of the academic body and refrain from interfering with the said decision unless it is shown to be clearly opposed to the statutory provisions in vogue.
The court also observed that it could not ignore the submission of the state government that a finding of the Single Judge that the experience of a teacher in the post of Director of Student Services/Programme Coordinator of NSS is not a 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. In academic matters, the decisions of the University or other Educational body had to be given due weightage, the court added
[ad_2]
Source link