johnsinghaj 15
- 0
AICTE eligibility
Asked by
johnsinghaj
plz resolve my problem
2 members have voted
-
Similar Content
-
By Harisrmite
If we discontinue any course before completion in a private college should we pay the full course fee as demanded by the management? (Is it legally correct for the college to ask full course fee?)
-
By ganpat1956
New Delhi, Apr.19 : The Central Information Commission (CIC) has asked the University Grants Commission (UGC), the apex body to regulate higher education in the country, to reply to an RTI application, noting that the matter has been pending for more than 10 months.
Expressing amazement over the delay in replying to the application, Information Commissioner O.P.Kejriwal said:"How long can this subject take. It is more than 10 months that the subject has been under consideration."
The Commission's observation came during the hearing of an RTI appeal made by Nagpur resident Atul Jain.
Jain, through his application in May, last year, has sought from the HRD Ministry certified copies of file noting pertaining to his UGC-NET examination, 2004, and wanted his certificate.
"The Commission makes a strong recommendation to the UGC to have the matter finalized as soon as possible and also to send a letter to the full satisfaction of the appellant," Kejariwal said in a recent order.
Earlier, an Under Secretary, representing HRD Ministry produced a letter before the Commission from the UGC, stating that they have sent a letter to the information seeker in June 2006.
The official also said that the UGC is considering the matter and would seek a legal opinion on it.
The appellant had filed a complaint with the Commission in October, last year after the public information officer of the Ministry had returned his RTI application in May last year advising him to approach the UGC directly.
In his appeal, Jain contended that although the matter was related to the UGC, the file was still with the HRD Ministry.
UGC told to reply to 10-month-old RTI application
-
-
Recently Browsing
No registered users viewing this page.
-
Topics
-
-
Blog Entries
-
-
Who's Online (See full list)
- Prasad GLN
From
V.Balamurugan and K.John Singh
Tirunelveli 627 011
e-mail: (Posting of mail ids & mob. no. is against Forum Rules -hence deleted)
Phone: XXXXXXX, XXXXXXXXX 13 Jan 2010
To
The Honorable Minister
Ministry of Human Resource & Development
New Delhi
Sir,
Sub: Redressal of Grievances and Suggestions to AICTE
I have the honour to bring the following facts for your kind consideration and favourable action.
We are working in a private engineering college as Asst Professors in the Computer Science and Engineering Department. Our qualifications are first class MCA/M.Sc(Information Technology), first class M.Tech(Computer Science and Engineering) and about to complete our Ph.D(Computer Science and Engineering). As per the existing faculty norms for Lecturer (now Asst Professor) cadre in the Department of Computer Science & Engineering, of Engineering colleges, a person with MCA / M.Sc followed with first class M.E (Computer Science and Engineering)/ M.Tech (Computer Science and Engineering) qualification is eligible. But as per the new norms the eligibility conditions are mentioned in AICTE website (AICTE) as follows.
“BE / BTech and ME / MTech in relevant subject with First Class or equivalent either in BE / BTech or ME / MTech”
Whereas as per the latest UGC Norms the eligibility conditions are as follows:
1.1. Master’s Degree with 55% marks in the appropriate branch of Engineering
(Engg.) & Technology (Tech) .
1.2. NET/SLET/SET shall also not be required for such Masters Programmes in
disciplines for which NET/SLET/SET is not conducted subject to the conditions
stipulated in these Regulations in clause.3.3.3.
1.3. A minimum score as stipulated in the Academic Performance Indicator (API)
based Performance Based Appraisal System (PBAS) developed by UGC in these
Regulations shall be a mandatory requirement
Under this circumstances, it creates ambiguity in many ways and causes a concern for the people like us. The abrupt changes in the policy decisions will seriously damage to the existing system. There are more than one thousand staff members, who are presently serving in private engineering colleges who were recruited as per the existing rules. It is not fair on the part of AICTE to curb the existing, well experienced faculty members by imposing restrictions. It seems that the rule makers fail to consider the prevailing conditions and the welfare of the existing members. The new rules affect us in the following ways.
1. The new rules block the students of Science stream from entering into engineering streams.
2. In many previous meetings of AICTE, the importance of the science is strongly insisted. However, the new rules do not consider it.
3. There is no provision in the new system that insists the qualifications related to the specialization of Engineering Teaching (such as B.Ed. for school education) for producing best engineering teachers.
4. Like the existing norms, there is no separate clause in the new norms that deals with eligibility of faculty members of computer science & engineering course. Since, Computer Science & Engineering field is still in its infant stage, there are no sufficient numbers of postgraduates with engineering background.
5. Further, since there is no clear demarcation among B.E.(Comp. Science & Engineering), B.Tech (IT), MCA, and M.Sc (Computer Science/ IT/ Software Engineering), all these students are undergoing more or less the same curriculum.
6. Although, on one side AICTE permits the science students to enter into PG course in Engineering, on the other side it is not at all giving any opportunity to them to become a teacher. It shows the dual standards of the AICTE. Instead of concentrating the quality education, the new AICTE rules were framed to suppress the teachers with science background.
7. As for as the faculty eligibility norms of MCA is concerned the new norms for Asst. Professor is given below.
“ BE/BTech and ME/MTech in relevant subject with First Class or equivalent either in BE/BTech or ME/MTech
OR
BE/ BTech and MCA with First class or equivalent in either BE/BTech or MCA OR
MCA with first class or equivalent with two years relevant experience”
8. The third part of the above rule is ridiculous and illogical. The rule says the Fresher with MCA qualification is not eligible to become a faculty member in AICTE approved institutions. we wonder, how can a person get relevant experience for two years without permitting him to work as faculty member. The definition for relevant experience is not given anywhere.
Under these circumstances we humbly request you to kindly look into these discrepancies and advise the AICTE to find suitable remedies. We are in the hope that our humble views will be considered with due care and the remedial action will be taken to display the corrected norms in the AICTE web sites very soon.
Thanking you very much,
Yours truly,
Copy to : 1. The Honorable President of India
2. The Chairman, UGC
3. The Chairman, AICTE
Share this post
Link to post
Share on other sites