Controversy regarding recruitment of PRO for the Central University of Jammu (CUJ) has taken a new turn with the RTI of the Shri Mata Vaishno Devi University (SMVDU) nailing the lie of the CUJ regarding the status of the SMVDU and experience of a particular ineligible candidate who was being favoured by the authorities.
The reply of the SMVDU to a RTI has exposed the CUJ authorities who were not only reportedly giving out misleading information to the media about the particular candidate but the Vice Chancellor of the CUJ Prof. Ashok Aima claimed in a news report that the SMVDU was a private university and as such the candidate Rajan Badyal working in the SMVDU was not bound by the rules and regulations of producing a No-objection certificate (NOC) or routing his application through the SMVDU.
However, the reply of the SMVDU to the RTI clearly says that the university is recognized under Section-2 (F) & 12 (B) of the UGC Act 1956 and it falls under the category of State University which clarifies that the SMVDU was not a private university. SMVDU being a state university, the candidate Badyal was bound to send his application to the CUJ through proper channel and also submit NOC from his employer university.
In a similar case the CUJ authorities a day prior to the interview for the post of PRO, did not allow a senior candidate Nutan Resutra to appear in the interview for the post of controller of examination and finance officer. In the reply to RTI, the authorities of CUJ have accepted that Badyal did not produce the NOC but have not clarified why he was allowed to appear in the interview without fulfilling the mandatory provision.
Although in its advertisement for the post of PRO, the CUJ had mentioned that 5 years experience was required for the post, but Badyal, who was among the dozen candidates, does not possess the required experience as the RTI discloses that he became PRO in the SMVDU on March 4, 2015 and as such he was having experience of only one year at the time of interview in the CUJ on March 30. Before that he was an office assistant in the SMVDU. Except Badyal, other candidates who had less than five years experience were not called for the interview.
While the SMVDU was clear in replying to the queries raised in the RTI, the CUJ was found not forthcoming by somewhat suppressing the information. The CUJ in reply to the RTI has tried to conceal more information rather than revealing the correct position. It is worth mentioning that the junior staff of the CUJ was reportedly reluctant to allow Badyal to appear before the interview board as he had not fulfilled the mandatory formalities, but the registrar of the CUJ took him before the board.