SC Reaffirms Mandatory Compliance with UGC Guidelines for Faculty Appointments
The Supreme Court in Dr Dharmendra Kumar v. Banaras Hindu University & Ors. has reiterated that all universities must strictly follow the University Grants Commission (UGC) guidelines. The observation came while the Court was hearing a case against Banaras Hindu University (BHU) concerning appointments made to Assistant Professor posts in 2013.
A Bench of Justice Prashant Kumar Mishra and Justice Vipul M Pancholi dealt with the petitions filed by Dharmendra Kumar and Brijesh Kumar Tiwari. They had challenged the selection process, alleging that it lacked transparency and ignored the UGC Regulations, 2013, which prescribe weightage of 50% for academic record, 30% for teaching skills and 20% for interview performance.
In the 2013 recruitment for the Department of Commerce, petitioner Brijesh claimed that although he stood first on all merit parameters—including API, screening and teaching ability scores—he was still not selected. Instead, candidates with lower merit were chosen due to high interview marks. Dharmendra raised similar concerns regarding appointments in the Agriculture Department.
Brijesh’s 2014 writ petition was dismissed by the Allahabad High Court in 2016, after which he approached the Supreme Court. The Court had granted interim status quo at the time. When the matter came up recently, the petitioners’ lawyer informed the Court that both petitioners are now serving as professors at JNU and Banda University and no longer wish to pursue the case.
The counsel also highlighted a recent Supreme Court ruling affirming that once a university or State adopts UGC Regulations, they must be mandatorily followed. Since BHU had adopted the UGC Regulations of 2010 and their subsequent amendments, the petitioners said the issue stands covered.
Taking note of these submissions, the Supreme Court disposed of the appeals and clarified that BHU—and any other university governed by the UGC Regulations—must strictly adhere to them in all future selections.
The Court remarked:
“It is needless to say that the respondent-university or any other university governed by the UGC Regulations, 2013, as amended from time to time, is obligated to follow the UGC guidelines.”
