Friends,
The NET/JRF aspirants have challenged the supplementary results of their examination conducted by University Grants Commission (UGC) on June 24 last year. There was much hue and cry over tough results declared by UGC on September 18 leading to declaration of supplementary results on November 12 by applying new eligibility criteria.
A high court division bench of justices Avinash Lavande and Arun Chaudhari on Wednesday directed the UGC to reply before March 18 which was also fixed as next date of hearing.
The NET/JRF aspirants have challenged the supplementary results of their examination conducted by University Grants Commission (UGC) on June 24 last year. There was much hue and cry over tough results declared by UGC on September 18 leading to declaration of supplementary results on November 12 by applying new eligibility criteria.
A high court division bench of justices Avinash Lavande and Arun Chaudhari on Wednesday directed the UGC to reply before March 18 which was also fixed as next date of hearing.
Scam behind the UGC's Appeal
ReplyDeleteto hckerala
To:
HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE DR.MANJULA CHELLUR
HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE K.VINOD CHANDRAN
Respected Madam/Sir,
In the following matter that will be placed before your honorable Court mostly by 14th of March or later the UGC has constituted NET review committee to circumvent the Court.
It has become customary of UGC to set up such committees to shield itself
from the wrath of the Courts. This committee is just an eyewash to
coverup the blunder of the June 2012 NET examination. The matter is now
with the Division Bench of the Kerala High Court. Now the AG's argument will
be to appeal to your Bench to ensure no interference of the Court with
the functioning of the committee! An eyewash!
http://www.indiaeducationreview.com/news/ugc-constitutes-net-review...
The UGC's NET examination had objectivity in evaluation built in to it even before this June 2012 examination in spite of having the third paper as written paper. The methodology was that UGC will decide the result only based on the performance in First and Second paper as per their norm and the third paper will be evaluated only for those who have cleared the First and Second paper to give an indication to the employers as to how that particular candidate fares in a subjective evaluation. Therefore the UGC's claim that the revised objective pattern as the reason for the anomaly in the result that required their intervention in deciding the Second Cut-Off after the conduct of examination is a cover-up to some scam. Though I am a petitioner against an earlier such Committee by UGC in UGC (The matter is referred as SLP (C) 36023 - 32 of 2010) in Supreme Court, I am without any way and means to convey this to the Bench and hence this e-mail
WA 44/2013 SRI.S.KRISHNAMOORTHY, CGC /
IN WPC 22187/2012 SRI.S.SUBHASH CHAND
& IA 107/2013 LEAVE SRI.NAGARAJ NARAYANAN
& IA 54/2013 IMPLEAD SRI.SAIJO HASSAN
& IA 71/2013 IMPLEAD SRI.PRATHAP PILLAI
................
WITH
WA 173/2013
IN WPC 23746/2012 SRI.S.KRISHNAMOORTHY, CGC /
& IA 88/2013 EXEMPT SRI.R.V.SREEJITH
Prof
But how are the JRF candidates affected?
ReplyDelete