Dear Friends,
The meeting of UGC NET victims held at Palakkad Malappuram on 26th Jan., 2014. The decision was taken to write a letter to Rahul Gandhi about informing the issue of UGC NET Exam June 2012. This is one of the strategic moves of UGC NET victims who are fighting together for justice against University Grants Commission. Everyone who is the victim of UGC NET Exam June 2012 is requested, advised and expected to send the following letter to Mr. Rahul Gandhi. So read
the following letter carefully first. Fill in the necessary information with details and send it to office@rahulgandhi.in. Download the copy of the letter enclosed at the end of this letter.
A Letter To Rahul Gandhi
To,
Rahul Gandhi
Member
of Parliament
12, Tughlak Lane,New Delhi - 110 011
India
Email
address office@rahulgandhi.in
Subject: A flagrant injustice done by UGC to
Students who took UGC NET June 2012.
(Matter related to CIVIL APPEAL NO. 8355 OF 2013
[Arising out of SLP (Civil) No. 19933 of 2013] University Grants Commission
& Anr. .. Versus Neha Anil Bobde (Gadekar) in the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India.)
Sir,
We all the citizens of India hereby
humbly admit that we have an abiding faith in Hon'ble Supreme Court of India and its judgments
and rulings; and we reverently follow them all. We have utmost trust and faith
in the Judiciary system of India,
here; we would like to bring your kind attention to the case regarding National
Eligibility Test- June 2012 conducted by University Grants Commission, New Delhi.
In
this exam many anomalies crept, which are related to qualification criterion,
main result and supplementary result of the same Exam.
UGC in a notification for the
advertisement of NET exam- June 2012 had displayed fixed qualifying criterion
for all the categories in a clear-cut terms.
But to our great Surprise, after the announcement of the result of the
said exam, UGC in a shocking and arbitrarily manner altered its minimum
criterion of qualification, which was raised way higher than the one which was
fixed earlier and advertised in the notification for net june-2012 exam.
Because
of this flawed and sudden change in criterion after examination, more than 1 lakh and 45 thousand examinees were deprived
of the opportunity for the noble profession of lectureship, simply because of
UGC fault , which has, no doubt, adversely affected the course of their life
and of all the members in their family who solely depended on them. All The
candidates who have fallen victims to this flawed decision of UGC are youth and
are working for private Institutions as bonded labours on paltry sum of salary.
Because of ugc’s arbitrary and myopic decision Dreams of their bright future are
shattered to pieces ……
To
this injustice, these victims have filed writ petitions in different STATE HIGH
COURTS of India,
all the resultant decisions of the different state high courts as mentioned
below were in the favor of 1 lakh and 45 thousand NET victims.
A
few of them are mentioned below for your kind reference and attention -
1- THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY, NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR.
IN WRIT PETITION NO. 4996 OF 2012---- (DOUBLE BENCH)
2- THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH SHIMLA IN CWP Nos.4602
of 2013 and 4698 of 2013 ---- (DOUBLE BENCH)
3- THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA IN W.P. (C) No.
22187 OF 2012
4- THE HIGH
COURT OF KARNATAKA, BANGALORE
IN W.P. No.1213 OF 2013
5- HIGH COURT OF
MADHYA PRADESH, BENCH AT GWALIOR
IN W.P. No. 41 OF 2013
6- THE HIGH
COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS IN W.P. No. 9962 OF 2013
7- THE MADURAI
BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT IN W.P. (MD) No. 2616 OF 2013
8- HIGH COURT OF
MADHYA PRADESH, BENCH AT GWALIOR
IN W.P. No. 3538 OF 2013
9-
THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, BANGALORE
IN W.P. No.41637 OF 2012.
In reply, UGC has filed SLP (civil) N0
19933 of 2013 against the decision of Hon'ble High Court of Judicature at Bombay, Nagpur.
And the Hon'ble
Supreme Court accepted UGC SLP by setting aside the verdict of Hon'ble Nagpur High Court
and also said that UGC has right to introduce qualification criterion and what
it did was nothing arbitrary and illegal.
Your
honor, we have tremendous respect for Hon'ble Supreme
Court and verdict it has passed in this regard. But then again, we all the
victims want to humbly bring to your kind notice that there were still certain crucial
points which were not legally considered
as we were not given the proper opportunity to present our case
effectively because of distortion of facts and truth by UGC. Therefore, we are imploring
and requesting you with greater hope and
optimism to reconsider points enumerated here below.
1) UGC
has announced two results: one main and another supplementary. In the second
results , UGC has declared some candidate qualified from Computer Science etc.,
who had scored merely 40% marks in
aggregate ; whereas candidate in Law, Commerce and other subjects having
secured 64.50% were disqualified.
The same exam notification was applicable to all the subjects, as Paper 1st
was common for all and as such qualifying criterion must be one and same for
all; but UGC has made a great deal of discrimination so far as the
Supplementary result is concerned. Prima
facie this act of UGC is a sheer
infringement of our fundamental right to equality (Article 14).
2) Secondly,
UGC had formed a moderation committee of senior academicians who have hurriedly
fixed faulty qualifying criteria based on complete discrimination, because how a candidates with a score of 40% marks became net qualified and how a candidate
with a score of 64.50% did not !!!!! .
We want to ask through your esteemed office, under what authority these
academician can take such an outrageous decision according to there whims and
fancies . We, 1 lakh and 45 thousands citizens of India, looking at your esteemed
office for answers to this question not yet answered…...
3) Thirdly,
UGC has repeatedly hollered aloud and tried to convince the Hon'ble Supreme
Court that it has already cleared in the
notification that qualifying criterion will be fixed in the wake of the result
is out. But see what UGC has put there
in the Notification. - “Only such candidates who obtain the minimum required
marks in each paper, separately, as
mentioned above, will be considered for final preparation of result.
However, the final qualifying criteria for Junior Research Fellowship
(JRF) and Eligibility for Lectureship shall be decided by UGC before
declaration of Result.”
But this condition
was not meant for category 2nd Eligibility for Lectureship Only
paper .
As even in the application form and question
paper of net exam there is column in which each candidate has to mention whether a candidate is
applying :-
1)
JRF
and eligibility for lectureship both. (Limited Seats)
OR
2) Eligibility for lectureship only. (Unlimited Seats)
This is clearly mentioned on page No 16 and 17 of
judgment (civil appeal N0 8355 of 2013 [Arising out of SLP (civil) N0 19933 of
2013] passed by the Hon'ble Supreme
Court-
Para 16. The
Committee revisited the results and decided to qualify a few additional
candidates for JRF and eligibility for lectureship both and eligibility for lectureship
only……
Therefore, terms and conditions
contained in UGC notifications were applicable to category
1) JRF and eligibility for
lectureship both, and not for the category 2) Eligibility for
lectureship only.
And
the question in dispute is only for category second. UGC has
wrongly and deliberately applied this wrong criteria to the category second as
well. ugc has distorted facts and fabricated
false arguments before Hon'ble
Supreme Court.
In December 2012, UGC has removed the said
clause just before 03 days of exam to save its own skin. Secondly, what UGC did
in NET June 2012, it didn’t do in Dec. 2012. We mean that it did not change
qualifying criterion after the results were out. But, why in NET June 2012 only
this has raises question and doubts…….
4) it
must be noted that how often qualifying criterion has changed for net june
2012.exam , After the exam is over….. is a sheer example of uncertainity and
arbitrary action on the part of ugc …..Please
have a look at it from following table.
No.
|
Criterion
|
Time of
Declaration
|
Applicable
for
|
Effect
|
1
|
Minimum
Qualification Criterion
|
Declared Before Exam
|
Applicable
For All Subjects
|
All Subjects candidates have equal chances |
2
|
1st
Final Qualification Criterion
|
Declared On Web- Site After 1 day of Declaration of
Result
|
Applicable
For All Subjects
|
Candidates having 65%, 60%, 55 % Marks for GEN, OBC,
and ST/SC respectively are declared Qualified.
|
3
|
Supplementary
Final Qualification Criterion
|
Declared After 05 Month of Exam and After 02 Month of 1st
Result
|
Applicable
For Some Subjects (by pick and choose method)
|
In
some Subjects Candidate having 40% marks declared qualified But in other Subjects
Candidate having 64.75 % marks still fail.
|
It is crystal clear that UGC has
repeatedly altered standards and criteria for qualification and passed some
candidates by going out of set norms and ways.
It is said rules of games
cannot be changed in the middle of the game and uncertainty must be avoided;
hence UGC can not play with the life of
students under the guise of the authorized regulations it has been entrusted.
NET is not at all meant for recruitment or
short listing for any other purposes, so
how can UGC take such an arbitrary
action and qualifies certain candidates wrongly disqualifies others wrongly. As
a matter of fact, NET is just qualification for lectureship and does not
guarantee any job .
5) In Civil APPEAL No.8355 of 2013 [arising out of SLP (civil)
No.19933of 2013] University Grant commission Anr…versus Neha Anil Bobade
(Gadeker) UGC has tried to misguide Hon'ble Supreme Court by providing fake information by
distorting and manipulating facts…. for instance it has attached to its paper
book notification of June 2013 instead of June 2012. And we believe that
UGC had done it deliberately ……one can have a clear idea from line No 8 on page
No 71 of SLP (Civil) No 19933/ 2013 University Grant commission Anr…versus Neha
Anil Bobade (Gadeker) that in the notification of “May 2013” and Step
I, Step II, Step III and Step IV mentioned in this page were missing in the UGC
notification of June 2012.
There are 79 names in the
list of coordinating University/collages on page No 77 to 88 while in June 2012
there were only 74 centers for exam. Five new centers were added into the
old list of December 2012 and of new
list of June 2013….. How could this be possible that the half of the
notifications applied form June 2012 and half
from June 2013 were merged into one…..so that facts can be manipulated
and distorted…
Sir, we all the citizen of India, have utmost
faith and belief in judicial System of
India and request your esteemed office to kindly review our case and provide justice
to the 1 lakh and 45 thousand youth of this country for whom you are the last
hope.
Thank
You,
Sign………………………………….……...
Dated.. Name-………………………………………
Place- Father’s
Name-…………………………….
Roll
No of NET June 2012- ………………
Address-
No comments:
Post a Comment