Delhi University panel's decision to review staff under CCS rules draws flak from teachers

NEW DELHI: Delhi University's decision to form a committee for the periodic review of its employees under the Central Civil Services (CCS) Fundamental Rule 56(j) has sparked strong opposition from faculty members, who allege the move undermines institutional autonomy and violates established procedures. The committee, constituted following a resolution passed by the university's Executive Council (EC) on May 23, held its first meeting on Monday and is scheduled to meet again on July 10.

The decision to form the panel was based on a notification issued by the Department of Personnel and Training (DoPT) under the Ministry of Personnel, Public Grievances and Pensions. However, teachers have raised concerns over the applicability of the rule on university staff, pointing out that DU employees are not governed by CCS rules.

"This notification is meant for central government employees who fall under the CCS framework. Since Delhi University employees are not covered by CCS, applying this notification is not legally valid," said Rudrashish Chakraborty, associate professor at Kirori Mal College. Chakraborty also questioned the process followed by the university, stating that the DoPT circular had not been routed through the Ministry of Education (MoE) or the University Grants Commission (UGC), the two primary agencies responsible for determining service conditions in central universities.

Also readJMI opens evaluation hall to accelerate exam result announcements

No MoE or UGC approval yet

"The notification has not been forwarded by either the MoE or UGC. Adopting it unilaterally is a breach of procedure," he added. Faculty members further argued that Delhi University, being established through an Act of Parliament, enjoys autonomy in regulating service matters, including disciplinary processes and staff evaluations. "Applying CCS rules on periodic review sidesteps the authority of the Executive Council and erodes the university's autonomy," several professors said. Chakraborty also criticised the age-specific nature of the rule.

"The rule mandates review only for employees aged 50 and above, implying that only senior staff face scrutiny while younger employees are exempt. This arbitrary age threshold defies logic and disrupts professional parity," he remarked. Mithuraaj Dhusiya, an elected EC member, also submitted a note of dissent to the committee. In his submission, he pointed out that the university had previously refrained from implementing pro-employee notifications of the central government, such as the revised National Pension Scheme (NPS) of 2021 and provisions for gratuity and old pension benefits for university staff.

"In stark contrast, the university administration is now rushing to implement this DoPT notification without prior approval from the MoE or UGC. This raises serious concerns about the administration's intent and reflects an anti-employee posture aimed at creating a climate of fear and coercion," Dhusiya said.