Editor,
I wish to draw attention to the gross irregularities observed in the recent recruitment process for teaching posts at the Arunachal Pradesh University (APU). The process appears to have deviated from the UGC Recruitment Rules, relying instead on arbitrary procedures that have undermined transparency and merit.
Serious flaws were evident from the preliminary screening stage itself. The mandatory Academic Performance Indicator (API) criteria prescribed under UGC Notification 2018 (Appendix II, Table 3A) for short-listing of candidates were completely disregarded. These criteria are essential as they assign weight to PhD qualification, research publications, and prior teaching/post-doctoral experiences.
The UGC mandates that universities have a definite regulation for the post-to-candidate interview ratio. However, the APU appears to have no such standardized regulation, which is evident in the disproportionately large number of candidates called for interviews without uniformity across departments for the post of assistant professor. Examples include highly disparate ratios such as 1:64 in English, 1:54 in tribal studies, 1:38 in commerce, 1:37 in sociology, 1:14 in social work, and so on.
The alleged university ordinance, which the APU claims to have followed, is entirely contradictory to UGC norms and the recruitment rules of all major central and state universities. The results of this structurally flawed approach are starkly evidenced by the selection list: out of the 15 candidates selected for the post of assistant professors, six were without a PhD and teaching experience, and nearly equal numbers placed on the waiting list also lack a PhD and teaching experience.
Furthermore, some selected PhD holders had minimal publication and academic credentials. Conversely, among the rejected candidates, there were a large number of individuals possessing PhD, post-doctorate degrees, more than a decade of teaching experience, and extensive publications of books, journal papers, and other research and academic activities.
This structural failure is particularly egregious at a time when the entire country, under the aegis of the NEP 2020, is focused on standardizing the quality of education through research and proactive academic engagement – the very reason the APU was established in 2022. The conduct of the university in this recruitment process tells a contradictory story and compromises its foundation.
It is high time that the authority concerned intervened and conducted an independent inquiry to ascertain the facts. The recruitment process must be declared null and void should gross violation of prevailing norms be proved. The prime, lone university of the state must not be allowed to compromise the quality of its education system in its formative stage, as recruiting qualified, experienced, and research-proactive candidates is the necessary first step to securing its future.
Aggrieved candidate