POSTPONED: DUTA Executive Meeting

In an example of disrespect towards all democratic norms of functioning, the DUTALeadership has postponed the Meeting of the DUTA Executive which was to be held on 16 March 2009 at 2 pm. This was a meeting which was not voluntarily called by the DUTA Leadership but had been requisitioned by certain members of the DUTA Executive.

It is extremely unfortunate that the DUTA Leadership has chosen to run away once again from facing up to the ire of the young teachers of the university who continue to be dismayed by its complete inaction on their just demands.

It seems the DUTA Leadship continues to treat the concern of the young teachers as secondary to everything else in the world. And despite this insensitive attitude on its part the DUTA Newsletter choses to blame the young teachers for dividing the DUTA!



Dear colleagues, A massive thank you for your overwhelming show of solidarity at our Dharna at D.U Arts Faculty on 25 February 2009. Due to the participation of hundreds of teachers from Delhi University, JNU, and Jamia, the Dharna was a huge success, and we now see clear signs of increased sensitivity among various quarters towards the concerns of young and prospective teachers. Your participation in the Dharna in large numbers was a crucial blow to the undemocratic DUTA leadership that is in power currently. We congratulate you all.
Our struggle for a better pay package for young and prospective teachers has now reached a crucial stage. The mandate we had received from all of you at the Dharna was very loud and clear. There is an intense feeling of betrayal by the DUTA leadership and the Government, and a sense of de-motivation is creeping into the rank of younger teachers arising from the reduction of AGP at each level within Pay Band 3, the loss of Academic Allowance, and the lengthening of first promotion from 9/10/11 years to 12/13/14 years with PhD/M.Phil/PG respectively. Unfortunately, in its latest newsletter released in March 2009, the DUTA leadership continues to issue canards against the agitated teachers. The current DUTA leadership publicly declares the present pay package as ‘historic’, and in its newsletter demands the “speedy” implementation of the MHRD Notification of 31.12.2008. It is unfortunate that Academic Allowance and the restoration of 9/10/11 years criterion for first substantial promotion to Associate Professorship do not even figure in the list of DUTA’s demands. It may be recalled that UGC after modifying the PRC Report had recommended PB 4 with GP 8700 in 9/10/11 years of service. (See the Newsletter of October-November, 2008, released on behalf of AAD itself). Historic negotiators have utterly failed in getting any of the substantial recommendations of the UGC approved by the Government. This so-called “historic” pay package is going to have more dangerous effects in the near future. According to media reports, owing to a substantial jump in the basic pay in PB 4, newly appointed and not so newly appointed Readers are likely to be fixed at the same basic pay. A host of legal complications is bound to arise if this actually happens. The legitimacy and prudence of the historic negotiators of this historic deal can seriously be called in question.
Ever since we realized that the present pay package was unjust, asymmetrical and discriminatory, we have not left any stone unturned to make the leadership aware of the worries and concerns of all young and prospective teachers. The amazing neglect shown towards younger and prospective teachers by the current DUTA leadership has forced us take up our issues ourselves. We have submitted a memorandum in this regard to the MHRD. Further, we are working rigorously on extending our movement to other Central Universities to sensitize them and bring them to our fold. In the course of our interaction we have realized that there is huge unrest in the rank of teachers in other Central Universities as well. They are equally agitated on account of the Government’s departure from its declared policy of attracting young talent to the teaching profession. Their sense of betrayal has led them to discuss the possibility of filing a Writ Petition against the Government for violating the doctrine of “just expectation”; and further for causing serious dislocations in the hitherto existing pay parities with respect to certain categories of employees. They have promised to extend their wholehearted support to our common cause. This will provide immense strength and a national dimension to our movement. We have created working groups for the purpose of contacting teachers of other Central Universities and brainstorming on the best methods to address them. We request you to volunteer for this task, so that we may accomplish our goals at a quicker pace, subsequent upon which we plan to take a protest march to the MHRD. We have raised our voice and echoed our concerns at every available forum. We even impressed upon Shri Alok Kumar Mehta, Hon’ble member of Lok Sabha (who raised this issue in the House under matter of urgent public importance), and also met Shri Rahul Gandhi, Hon’ble member of Lok Sabha, who promised to forward the matter to the MHRD. As many saw for themselves, the real agenda of the current DUTA leadership got exposed as soon as the Draft UGC Regulations pertaining to promotion and service conditions of teachers were posted on the UGC website. The said Regulations imposed stringent conditions on all teachers (Asstt. Professor, Associate professor, and Professor) and linked them with promotions. As we all know, the pernicious Draft Regulations visibly perturbed all teachers. To our initial relief, the DUTA leadership wasted no time in convening an emergent meeting of the DUTA Executive on 17 February, 2009. The meeting called for a complete strike on 19th and 20th February. It also decided to stage a demonstration at UGC on 24th February. However, again as is familiar to all, the UGC in the meanwhile issued a clarification on 19th February in which it stated that incumbent Readers and Lecturers (Selection Grade) would be exempted from said UGC Regulations and would be placed in PB 4 at appropriate stage as per the MHRD Notification. It is important to note that the UGC Clarification that came on 19th February exempted only incumbent Readers and Lecturers in Selection Grade while Asstt. Professors and Professors continue to be potentially governed by the new regime of API, WP and PASS system as laid down by the UGC for promotion to higher Pay Band and vertical movement within a Pay Band. In a shocking demonstration of bias, the DUTA/FEDCUTA not only called off the strike, but it also ‘deferred’ the demonstration at UGC on 24th February. We put on record that this deferred strike has still not been held and no one knows if it ever be held.
Our serious doubts if the current leadership was representing the interests of all sections of teaching community have only been deepened by this episode. Worse, the current DUTA leadership has gone to the extent of holding the aggrieved younger teachers responsible for the objectionable Draft Regulation issued by the UGC!! Such inane and patently false statements need to be condemned in the strongest possible terms. Ours is a genuine movement and our struggle for better conditions for younger faculty cannot be dismissed by the insensitive DUTA leadership which has on its part ceased to represent the legitimate interests of all sections of teaching community. It has lost its focus, strayed from crucial issues and has come to depend increasingly on the politics of slander. History repeats itself!! Never did we realize the meaning of this proverb as we are doing today! It is worthwhile to travel back in history and quote an interesting excerpt from Indian Express, 29 April 1998:
“Meanwhile, the Association of Young Academics (AYA) has expressed apprehension about the intentions of the DUTA leadership. “We are worried that during negotiations with the HRD minister we will be made the sacrificial lambs,” says Aditya Narayan Misra, convenor of AYA. “The DUTA leadership is not paying attention to our demands. Though everyone is talking about trying to bring in better talent, by giving lecturers a bad deal good people will never come in.” (
Mr. Aditya Narayan Mishra has now done exactly what he stated 10 years ago against the then DUTA leadership. Young teachers have been made, to use Mr. Mishra’s own words, “sacrificial lambs” this time too. We request Mr. Aditya Narayan Mishra, the Former Convenor of AYA (Association of Young Academics) and incumbent DUTA President, to refrain from vilification campaign that we are dividing DUTA. Our repeated and genuine efforts to put across our concerns in the ranks of DUTA leadership soon after the MHRD notification have met with repeated failure and dismissal by the DUTA leadership. Our concerns have been misleadingly portrayed as an attempt to divide DUTA. Perhaps they don’t realize that DUTA is too sacrosanct to be divided. Our democratic right to be heard at every stage, and to be represented faithfully by our elected leadership has been denied by a tried and tested tactic – trying to show that we are “only a handful” in number. Further, fictitious theories regarding our supposed party affiliations have been floated – as if we are bereft of political wisdom ourselves, and require secret party affiliations to appreciate our real fortunes in the present pay package! Despite their best efforts and a parallel vilification campaign, which is the main political plank of current dispensation, we have demonstrated at our Dharna and through our sustained campaign that we are not a “handful”, and that our demands and concerns cannot be undermined any longer. The hypocrisy of the leadership has now come to the fore. The reason why the leadership has demanded ‘speedy’ implementation of the MHRD notification, and has been refraining from chalking out any concrete action plan for the pursuit of our demands is that the leadership is probably hand in glove with the Government. Opposing the Government at this stage would have caused untold embarrassment to the negotiators of the deal who wholeheartedly accepted the package. The so called “unresolved” demands and “anomalies” listed in the DUTA Newsletter are not actually “unresolved” and “anomalies”. This was what was offered by the Government and accepted by the negotiators in the whole process of bargain.
We still hope that wisdom prevails, even belatedly, and the DUTA leadership chalks out a concrete action programme for the pursuit of our demands. Any false pretense of unity can 4
only suppress crucial voices and inputs. This is not the ethic of a trade union to represent the interests of some while leaving others to flounder. Readers have got PB 4 because they rightly deserved it. It is again very regrettable that historic negotiators are resorting to demagogic politics and whispering campaign across a section that PB 4 would be taken back by the Government on account of Young teachers’ protest against the present pay package! You may recall that young teachers had succeeded in seeking a promise from the DUTA Executive members present at the Dharna Site on 25.02.2009 that they would requisition a meeting of the Executive to compel DUTA to undertake action programme for pursuing young teachers’ demand. The requisitioned meeting was scheduled to take place on 16.03.2009. The same has been postponed for conspicuous reasons. This is again unfortunate. The DUTA leadership is hell-bent on its policy of perpetual evasion of young teachers’ demands. We must fight for restoring democratic propriety in DUTA and facilitating the conditions of internal democracy within DUTA. Also, we trust that the Government shall consider demands of all young teachers and prospective entrants to this profession with care and sensitivity if it is honest in keeping its tryst with its countrymen of creating a glorious future for higher education in India. There is a long fight ahead; and the teachers’ movement can succeed only if all sections of teaching community support each others’ cause.
Released by Young Teachers of Delhi University YDUTA
Contact details: # 9868215040 # 9868162250 # # Email: # Email:

Pensioners feel betrayed by DUTA Leadership

According to the University Today (1 March 2009) : ” A few teachers have formed a Delhi University Retired Teachers’ Association and currently enrolling as members anyone who is a retired teachers of DU.”

It paper also exlains the issue facing the pensioners in the 6th Pay Review Process: “Whereas the Minister, Punderswari Devi, announced in the Lok Sabha on 16 December last that those who were in the Readers’ grade will be put into PB-4 in they have completed 12 years (with Ph.D.), 13 years (M.Phil) and 14 years (without M.Phil./Ph.D.), some over zealous Babu in the MHRD while issuing the fatwa dated 31 December 2008 made the schema to stand on its head by providing that those who had completed 3 years as on 1.1.2006 will move to get their PB-4.

“This unwarreanted inclusion of just 3 words ‘as on 1.1.2006′ has made the whole situation different and robbed the pensioners of a possible higher pension of the minimum of the PB-4 band.

“The most noxious part of this all is that nobody in the DUTA/ FEDCUTA even wants to understand this simple thing. And there has not been a word for those hapless retired people. If that’s the way they run their teachers’ movement, well …”

The game is clear: only those sections of the teaching community who have a substantial chunk of votes in the DUTA elections will have their intersts protected by the current DUTA/ FEDCUTA. Though, young teachers are in a minority today in terms of the electorate, retired teachers do have a vote.

Junior Teachers on the Warpath

Response to DUTA Newsletter March 2009

After a long silence the DUTA Leadership has come out with a Newsletter for March 2009. But as has been customary for the current DUTA Leadership on the issue of the Pay Review Process, even this communication is replete with misinformation. We seek to counter some of them:

Claim 1: “It was entirely due to the DUTA led FEDCUTA’s struggle that the UGC was forced to … withdraw its retrograde draft Regulation”

Truth: The UGC has not yet withdrawn the Draft Regulations. They are still placed on the UGC website. If the Draft Regulations were withdrawn in totality, there would have been no need for a clarification. The clarification only means that all incumbent Readers/ Lecturers (Selection Grade) will be redesignated as Associate Professors without having to face an interview. The proposal to enact the irrational PASS/API/WP system still stands!

Claim 2: “The UGC draft notifications totally negated both the letter and the spirit of the [of] the MHRD notification and the statement of the MoS of MHRD in the Lok Sabha on 16 December 2008.”

Truth: The downgradation of entry level AGP to 6000, prolongation of the service requirement for promotion to Associate Professorship and for Direct Appointments by 3 years, and denial of Academic Allowance has reduced the preference of the teaching profession for the next generation. Simultaneously, young incumbents have been left with a feeling of utter neglect. In her statement the MoS of MHRD also stated: “One of the critical factors affecting the quality of universities and institutions imparting higher education, is our inability to attract and retain young and talented persons to the teaching profession, leading over a period of time to shortage of teachers in central as well as state universities and other higher educational institutions.” But the provisions in her statement worked contrary to the concerns she expressed.

Interestingly, the DUTA Leadership is perturbed only by the “letter and spirit” of the MHRD Notification only when it comes to the issue concerning Associate Professors and exercises complete oblivion when it comes to the rest. This attitude does not be hove a responsive trade union.

Claim 3: “Immediately after appearance of the draft notification on the UGC website, an emergency meeting of DUTA Executive was convened on 17 February 2009…. Subsequently, on receipt of clarification… an emergency meeting of DUTA Executive was convened on 20 February 2009 to take stock of the situation…. decided that the demonstration at UGC on 24 February should be deferred.”

Truth: That’s right! It took the DUTA just 24 hours to call a meeting to take action against the UGC. And when a large number of teachers have been crying hoarse, pleading for two months for action against the MHRD it has been silent. Only promised backdoor negotiations and no confrontation. Such backdoor negotiations, if they have at all happened, have been utter failures. Why has the DUTA Leadership shown such aversion to mobilise teachers against the MHRD?

And what was the haste in “deferring” the agitation when so many issues remained unresolved?

Claim 4: “It is really unfortunate, rather painful, that some of the teachers in the General Body meeting held on 5 February 2009 attempted to disrupt the proceedings.”

Truth: The responsibility of the disruption of proceedings on 5 February, lies squarely on the undemocratic attitude of the DUTA Leadership and its steadfast refusal to allow any meaningful discussion on the issues involved or preventing any dissenting voice to speak. Notably, the attempt by certain members of the DUTA Executive to table an amendment to the DUTA Resolution was scuttled.

Claim 5: “It [the show of dissent at the DUTA GBM] gave a signal to the UGC that DUTA is a divided house which apparently emboldened the UGC … to tamper with MHRD Notification …. bring more stringent regulations for promotions…”

Truth: Though such a conclusion is utterly far fetched, it the DUTA Leadership which must take responsibility for dividing the house. Unity cannot be imposed by silencing genuine concerns of teachers. It is the repeated refusal of the DUTA Leadership to address the concerns of the young teachers that has led to an unfortunate confrontation.

Claim 6: “Had we accepted Chadha Committee recommendations almost every Delhi University teacher would have retried in PB-3 only, wherein, in the new scheme, every teacher Ph.D. Or non-Ph.D. will be entitled to PB-4.

Truth: The UGC Draft Regulations (still on the UGC website) Section 4.3.0.i states that the necessary qualification for Associate Professorship would be: “Good academic record with a Ph.D. degree in the concerned or allied disciplines.”

Of course, since incumbent Readers/ Lecturers (Selection Grade) would be automatically redesignated as Associate Professors this clause does not apply to them. It only applies to Assistant Professors who do not figure in the DUTA Leadership’s scheme of things or its definition of “every teacher”.

We urge upon the DUTA Leadership to take a lead in reasserting the legitimacy of the DUTA by showing sincerity towards all constituents of the DUTA. Certainly an united DUTA is a stronger DUTA and the onus is on the DUTA Leadership to build the strength.

No Pension Scheme

What is the New Pension Scheme?

All Central Government employees, including Delhi University Teachers, how have joined permanent service on or after 1.1.2004 come under the New Pension Scheme (NPS). It covers both Pension as well as Provident Fund.

How is it different from the Old Pension Scheme?

A minimum of 10% of Basic Pay (BP) and Dearness Allowance (DA) is deducted from the salary and added to the Employee’s Provident Fund (EPF).

A minimum of 10% of Basic Pay (BP) and Dearness Allowance (DA) is deducted from the salary and added to the Contributory Provident Fund (CPF). This is Teir-I contribution.

The employee can choose to get more amount deducted.

The employee can choose to get more amount deducted. This is Teir-II contribution.

The Employer (i.e. government) contributes nothing to the PF while the employee is in service.

The Employer contributes 10% (not more) of the employee’s BP and DA to the employee’s CPF.

The entire contibution of the employee is eligible for exemption for Income Tax purposes.

Only Teir-I contribution of the employee is eligible for deduction for Income Tax purposes.

The sum accumulated is invested in Fixed Deposit schemes in various Banks at attractive interest rates and the interest is added to the employee’s EPF account.

The sum accumulated is to be invested in Pension Funds (similar to Mutual Funds).
These Pension Funds may invest all or part of the amount in Stock Markets and the returns dependent on market movements.
Currently, the government has apponted the State Bank of India, ICICI Bank, Reliance and HDFC Bank as Pension Fund Managers. (After the current financial crisis do you trust the private banks or the stock market??)

During the service years an employee can take a loan of upto 75% from her EPF or withdraw upto 50% of the total accumulated amount on account of certain special expenditure like marriage of children or house construction.

The employee is awarded no withdrawal or loans against the Teir-I contribution or the Employer’s contribution.

At the time of retirement the entire accumulated amount is paid to the employee.

Only 60% of the total accumulated amount of Teir-I is paid to the employee at retirement. (That is if any amount is spared after the ravages of the stock market)

The pension of the employee is decided as the 40% of average of the BP for the last 3 months (prior to retirement). The pension paid to the employee will take into account the the increase in DA announced by the government from time to time.

The remaining 40% of the accumulated amount from the CPF is to be invested once again with the Pension Fund Manager and Pension paid by them. (That is even after retirement an employee has to depend on the vagaries of the market for her pension.)

Read More:

Features of the NPS

Social Security Benefits and the New Pension Scheme

Social Security at Stake

Junior Teachers Disadvantaged by MHRD Notification

The sense of betrayal among young teachers, due to the attitude of the MHRD, UGC and the DUTA/FEDCUTA Leadership is almost complete, it is necessary to take a closer look at certain figures understand the betrayal. The Figure1 shows a comparison of career gross pay for teachers in various stages of their career according to (a) the UGC Pay Review Committee (Chaddha Committee); (b) the MHRD notification; and (c) after a proportionate fixation of minimum Pay-in-Pay Band. Though (a) is part of an official document and (b) is an official notification.


At the initial stages of the Pay Review process, a few of the principal demands of the college teachers were:

  1. A higher initial pay, i.e. higher in comparison to Grade ‘A’ Officers, as teaching is a late entry profession. Also, the fact that the IAS offers numerous perks and fast track increments, means that teaching remains an extremely unattractive profession in comparison.

  2. Prevention of stagnation in the final years of service. This should be done through an assured third promotion to Professorship.

  3. Academic Allowance.

These demands also formed the bulwark of the DUTA/FEDCUTA Charter to the UGC Pay Review Committee.

The report of the UGC Pay Review (3.10.2008) tried to address some of this issues by offering:

  1. A higher initial pay through a Grade Pay of 6600 in PB3. (Grade ‘A’ beginning at GP 5400 in PB3)

  2. Two Advance Increments for NET.

  3. Third promotion in colleges in the form of Senior Associate Professor with GP 8700 in PB4 for all with Ph.D. (even without Ph.D. all teachers would reach PB-4 in normal course latest after 17 years).

  4. Academic Allowance of Rs. 1500 per month for Assistant Professors and Rs. 1200 for Associate Professors.

The UGC PRC also recommended in its report several other proposals which would grant greater respectability to the teaching profession:

  1. Return to the Old Pension Scheme

  2. Research Grants of Rs. 2-5 lakhs.

  3. Better Medical Insurance.

However, the Report of the UGC PRC had certain glaring drawbacks:

  1. Proposal to introduce a system of students’ evaluation of teachers’ performance

  2. Distinction between college and university teachers in terms of promotion to Professorship

  3. Though it provided an almost uniform rise in salary throughout a teachers career (Fig.1), the percentage increase in salary from the existing scales (Fig.2) was lesser in comparison to the new entrants.

  4. Though IAS officers were to enter into PB4 after 13 years of service, a college teacher (without M.Phil/Ph.D.) would do so after 17 years. (N.B.: The propaganda that it was only the MHRD Notification which granted PB4 to college teachers is a monumental lie!)

In sum, therefore, though the UGC PRC’s proposals were attractive to those in the early stages of their career and those yet to enter the profession, they were lesser attractive for those who were in the middle or mature years of their career. For the electoral interests of the DUTA Leadership this was suicidal, for it could not hope to win elections with votes from would-be-teachers. Also, the DUTA Leadership themselves being Associate Professors were not to enthused by the efforts to attract talent to teaching.

The UGC PRC was opposed for its “negative features” by all teachers. Everyone participated in the agitation for parity with the IAS in reaching PB4. After almost three months the MHRD notification was issued on the eve of the elections to the Academic and Executive Councils. Without any delay the

DUTA Leadership went on an overdrive to celebrate the ‘historic’ achievements. They celebrated the entry into PB4 for teachers after 12/13/14 years of service, i.e. a reduction of three years from the UGC PRC Report.

But the celebration glossed over:

  1. the reduced Minimum Pay-in-Pay Band for Assistant Professors due to arbitrary fixation of Academic Grade Pay (AGP)

  2. the pushing back of promotion to Associate Professorship by 3 years, from 9/10/11 years to 12/13/14 years.

  3. No increments for NET.

  4. No Academic Allowance

  5. No Research Grant

  6. Continuance of New Pension Scheme

  7. a chimera of “Professorship” in colleges where a quota system would be followed.

The resulting document shows that the table were now turned overwhelmingly against Assistant Professors who were saddled with a far lesser percentage hike in their salaries in comparison to Associate Professors (Fig.2). Also, we can see a stark difference in scales at the 12th/13th/14th year of service. It seems after that stage teachers enter a different profession altogether!


In effect the MHRD Proposals lead to a reduction in salary of over Rs. 40 lakhs against what was proposed by the UGC-PRC. (See Loss Calculator and Mathematics of Betrayal)

A few illustrations:

Old Scales


MHRD Notification

Gross Pay After 8 years




Basic Pay After 15 years




Basic Pay After 24 years




A comparison of Basic Pay in various stages of career over the last several Pay Reviews shows how skewed the current proposals are:


4th Pay Review

5th Pay Review

6th Pay Review (MHRD Notification)

Lecturer/ Assistant Professor




Lecturer (Senior)/ Assistant Professor




Lecturer Selection Grade/ Associate Professor (after 12/13/14 years)




So much for getting PB4 after 12/13/14 years of service instead of 15/16/17 years. Many younger teachers may never see that date as by the time we reach there it would be time for the 7th Pay Commission.

How could the DUTA/FEDCUTA Leadership agree to such a proposal? What were their compulsions?

Why should our students choose teaching as a profession?

Why should we not quit teaching if we find better opportunities?

Download a Printable Version

DUTA Executive Meeting Requisitioned

A Meeting of the DUTA Executive has been requisitioned on 2 March 2009 by certain members of the DUTA Executive “to address the widespread misgiving that the charter of demands of the teaching profession is being given a quiet burial…. [and to ensure] a sense of dejection over the silence on its demands does not grow, especially among its younger members”.

We urge on all members of the DUTA Executive, especially those belonging to organisations who were present at the Dharna on 25.02.2009, to support the requisition without further delay.

We urge the DUTA President to convene a meeting of the DUTA Executive immediately. We wonder why the promptness shown by him in convening a meeting of the DUTA Executive after the publication of the UGC Draft Regulations, has not been repeated in this case (the UGC Draft Regulations were published on 15.02.2009 and a DUTA Executive Meeting was convened for 17.02.2209)!

Read the text of the Requisition.

Report in ‘Dainik Jagran’ 4.3.2009

With the announcement of elections, the issue of the hike in pay for teachers of central universities has fallen into difficulty. The Ministry of Human Resources Development (MHRD) has sought a middle path for this. The Ministry has directed the University Grants Commission (UGC) to release 40% of arrears along with the salary payable for March. Due to differences in interpretation of the recommendations by the Pay Review Committee and the UGC, teachers of Central Universities are yet to get pay acording to the 6th Pay Review. According to the Pay Commission recommendations, the Pay Review Committee wants to keep a certain grade within a range while increasing salaries. But according the UGC this would result in teachers of a seniority range of five years remaining in the same grade, which is not desireable for maintaining seniority for university teachers. The UGC has said that teachers can be kept in the same grade for a maximum period of two years.

केंद्रीय विवि शिक्षकों के वेतन में वृद्धि होगी

नीलू रंजन, नई दिल्ली : चुनाव की घोषणा के साथ ही केंद्रीय विश्वविद्यालयों के शिक्षकों के लिए छठे वेतन आयोग की सिफारिशों के अनुरूप वेतनवृद्धि का मामला फिलहाल खटाई में पड़ गया है। मानव संसाधन विकास मंत्रालय ने इसके लिए बीच का रास्ता निकाल लिया है। मंत्रालय ने विश्वविद्यालय अनुदान आयोग (यूजीसी) से कहा है कि फिलहाल इन शिक्षकों को छठे वेतन आयोग की सिफारिशों के अनुसार होने वाले संभावित वेतनवृद्धि का 40 प्रतिशत मार्च के वेतन के साथ देने की व्यवस्था करे। यूजीसी और वेतन समीक्षा समिति द्वारा छठे वेतन आयोग की सिफारिशों की अपने-अपने हिसाब से व्याख्या करने के कारण केंद्रीय विश्वविद्यालय के शिक्षकों को अभी तक छठे वेतन आयोग की सिफारिशों के अनुरूप वेतन नहीं मिल पाया है। वेतन आयोग की सिफारिशों के अनुसार वेतन समीक्षा समिति एक खास रेंज के वेतनमान को एक ग्रेड में रख कर वेतनवृद्धि करना चाहता है। यूजीसी का कहना है कि इससे पांच साल तक के वरिष्ठ और कनिष्ठ शिक्षकों का वेतन और ग्रेड समान हो जाएगा, जो विश्वविद्यालय शिक्षकों के वरीयता क्रम के लिहाज से सही नहीं है। यूजीसी का कहना है कि अधिकतम दो साल के सेवाकाल के अंतर वाले शिक्षकों को एक ग्रेड में रखा जा सकता है।

check original page here.

Press Conference

The Joint Action Committee will be addressing a Press Conference on Monday, 2 March 2009 at 5pm at the Office of the JNU Teachers’ Association (near the Dean of Students’ Welfare Office, JNU)

To remain informed about the latest developments please subscribe to the following mailing lists:

Teachers for Dignity (Yahoo Group)
Teachers for Dignity (Google Group)