Tuesday 29 March 2016

Decision Reserved


Reserved decision is a legal term. After the hearing of a trial or the argument of a motion a judge might not immediately deliver a decision, but instead take time to review evidence and the law and deliver a decision at a later time, usually in a written form.

It is a more thought out decision compared to ex tempore where a judge hands down a decision of a case soon or right after a hearing.

Retirement age of NIPER employees

Under the NIPER Statutes approved by Visitor (President of India) and published in Gazette on 30-10-2003, appointments at NIPER were restricted only by time (5 years) and not by age (age of retirement from contract not mentioned). 

Decision of NIPER (Society) BOG to enhance retirement age (from contract) from 60 to 62 years in 21st Meeting of BOG held on 9-2-1999 was already rendered NULL AND VOID after passing of the NIPER Act on 26-06-1998 and publication of  NIPER Statutes on 30-10-2003. 

Statutes were made by BOG with previous approval of Visitor and duly published in Gazette and specifically restricted ‘contractual appointment’ at NIPER only by time (5 years), removing the clause of age (62 years).

Contractual System of Appointments at NIPER is abolished vide Gazette notification dated 7-7-2014: Appointments to be made on regular basis instead of contractual 

Existing employees to be regularized only after review as per clause 6.2 reproduced below:

“ 6.2 A high level Committee may be constituted with the approval of NIPER, Mohali, including an officer not below the rank of Joint Secretary from the Ministry of Chemicals and Fertilizers (Department of Pharmaceuticals) which will examine and recommend the regularization of existing contractual employees taking into account, inter-alia, the following criteria:

i) whether a regular method of recruitment was followed in a fair and transparent manner while appointing the existing contractual employee;

(ii) whether his or her past performance and the service record have been found satisfactory;

(iii) whether he or she fulfilled the qualification provided for that particular post at the time of his or her appointment on which he or she is being considered for regularisation.

Monday 28 March 2016

NIPER service conditions --- The Past Present and Future

1.       None of the professors removed are regular employees but are still contractual employees: NIPER since its inception and right from first day of recruitment in 1991 was following a policy of ‘contractual appointments’ in which faculty members were appointed only for a term of 5 years. This was done to ensure that all sanctioned posts were not permanently occupied and scope remained to hire other people also. From 1991 to 2014, NIPER followed only contractual system of appointment and none of the existing faculty of NIPER is regularized till date, including those who have filed cases in the High Court after being removed from service on expiry of contract and also abolition of contract system of appointment on 7-7-2014.

2.       To compensate for loss of ‘permanent’ status and appointment on contract basis, NIPER already gave strong incentives to faculty, which they duly accepted at joining: To attract faculty to NIPER on contractual basis, NIPER introduced two strong incentives –

·         Contributory provident fund -in which government contributed an equal monthly amount to that contributed by employee in his CPF account i.e. 10% of basic salary)
·         Provision for additional income from consultancy to industry: This was over and above the regular salary and consultancy could be carried out during working hours in the institute. Several faculty members earned handsome amounts as ‘consultancy’ which far exceeded their salary and same was duly paid to them by institute, which also took a share as per the approved consultancy rules given in NIPER Act and Statutes.

3.       Question of retirement age is not mentioned anywhere in the statutes because no employee was regular and all appointments were being made on contract basis for 5 years: However, in one of its meetings, the NIPER Board of Governors had restricted contract period to either 5 years or 62 years of age, whichever was less i.e. if person was 52 years and was hired on contract for 5 years, he could continue till 57. However, if he was 60 and was hired for 5 years, his contract would expire when he attained 62 years age. Subsequently, in 2014, before the contract system was abolished, the BOG enhanced the age for continuation on contract as 65 years, but since contract system itself got abolished, this holds no meaning and cannot be taken as age of retirement.

4.       Contract system was abolished in 2014 and after the abolition of contract system at NIPER, since appointments are now being made on regular basis, the age of retirement has come up: Ministry duly consulted legal experts and others and in view of existing rules in place for autonomous institutes funded by Ministry, fixed the retirement age at 60 years.

Table 1:  Extracts from BOG Minutes relating to service conditions of NIPER faculty- Contractual vs Regular
BOG Meeting No. Date
Relevant Extracts /Remarks
1st BOG Meeting
Held under the Chairmanship of Mr. M.S. Gill, Secretary to Govt. of India, Department of Chemicals and Petrochemicals.

3rd BOG Meeting dated 
Agenda 3.4: APPLICATION OF ALL RULES AND REGULATIONS OF CENTRAL GOVERNMENT TO NIPER. The interim arrangement, as proposed in the Agenda Notes was approved by the Board. The Board, however, emphasized the need for NIPER promulgating its own rules and regulations, as soon as possible, after the Director took over.

4th BOG Meeting dated
2. With the permission of the Chair, the Board first took up the Supplementary Agenda Item relating to the Selection and appointment of DrC.L.Kaul as Director (NIPER). OSD (NIPER) summarized the proposal. The participants unanimously approved the proposal for appointment of DrC.L.Kaul to the post of Director (NIPER) at Rs.7,600/- per month in the pay scale of Rs.7300-7600/-, plus usual allowances and perks, for a period of 5 years. They appreciated the choice of DrKaul for appointment as the first Director of NIPER.
3.6.4 The question of the nature of employment was also discussed. The alternatives were a regular service, a contract service and a service on deputation for a fixed period. Keeping in view the project status of NIPER being an Institute of National Importance and the desirability of having highly competent and devoted faculty members from time to time, the consensus was in favour of Contract Service and deputation service, instead of closing the doors to future entrants by filling up positions at all levels by regular appointments.Dr Rama Rao particularly emphasized the need for employing the faculty members on contract service. It was agreed that it should be a contract or deputation for 5 years which could be extended further depending upon the performance of the individual and the requirements of the Institute.
3.6.5 Another view which was highlighted by DrParvinder Singh and prevailed dominantly was for giving adequate incentives as an attraction for not only competent faculty members volunteering to join the Institute but also their continuing with it and putting in their best keeping in view the avenues available to them in the Institute. The Chairman directed that the package of incentives given by IICT, Hyderabad and PGIMER, Chandigarh should be gone into by a Working Group comprising Dr Rama Rao, DrWalia and DrB.B.Goyal, of which the coordinator will be OSD(N), and a suitable package prepared for NIPER. The gist of the package, as approved by the Chairman on behalf of the Board of Governors, should be incorporated in the offers of appointment to be issued to the selected candidates.

5th BOG Meeting dated
DrKaul summarized the position of the progress of various buildings and their completion status. He also informed the members that about 8 faculty members have joined the Institute.

10th BOG Meeting dated
Agenda 7 iii.The recruitment rules of NIPER were approved, in principle, by the Board and these rules will have to be approved by the Government laterand in case of any change, same can be incorporated at a later date. The meeting ended with vote of thanks to the Chair.
16th BOG Meeting
Agenda 8. The Director informed the Board that the revised pay scales of the 5th pay commission have been implemented provisionally. An undertaking was taken from all the employees that the differences if any would be recovered from them. In view of the contractual nature of employmentin NIPER the Chairman asked Mr. Goyal at the next Board Meeting.
19th BOG Meeting
Agenda Item 2:The minutes of the meeting of the EFC held on 20th April, 1998 were approved. The Director informed the Board that EFC in the above meeting approved the loan schemes for NIPER employees for motor car, motor cycle, scooter and personal computer.The scheme envisages that the loan facility will be provided by the bank and NIPER will only subscribe to the difference in the rate of interest between the bank and the Government rates as applicable. The Chairman raiseda point regarding the contractual nature of the job of NIPER employees and emphasized the pointregarding the recovery of loan from the employees since the contract period is only for 5 years.Shri Sood replied that NIPER will have no responsibility as regards the repayment and thecontract will be between the individual and the bank and NIPER’s responsibility is only forpayment of the difference in the rate of interest between the Govt. and the bank. DrNityaNandmentioned that the contractual appointments have become very common these days. Even in CSIRand IISc.,Banglore have similar contractual services. He suggested to collect the information fromCSIR and IISc. Banglore and put up the same to the Board in its next meeting. The Directorfurther informed the Board that the loan facility will be available to those employees who have putminimum 2 years of service and the loan scheme will be available to 4 persons per year to beginwith.
Agenda Item 6:The Director presented the report of the selection committee for the faculty positions. He informed the Board that the following candidates have been selected for the faculty positions:
Dr. Krishna R.Iyer, Assistant Professor, Pharmacology & Toxicology
DrSubodh Kumar, Associate Professor, Medicinal Chemistry
Dr G Parthasarathi, Asst. Professor, Pharm. Practice
Dr G Vaidyanathan, Asst. Professor, Pharm. Analysis
Mr. Y K Anand, Associate Professor, Educational Development.
The Board approved the above positions and asked the Director to send the appointment letters to these candidates.
20th BOG Meeting
Agenda Item 1:xxxx
As regards Item No. 3 of the minutes in connection with the new positions approved by the Board in its meeting held on 6th July, 1998, a question was raised by the Director whether approval of theFinance Ministry is essential for filling these posts. The number of positions approved in the first
phase is 65 for technical and 28 for administration side. After discussions it was decided that it is notnecessary to take approval for this from the Finance Ministry after the passing of the NIPER Act.
Supplementary Agenda Item 1:The Director placed before the Board a document which was prepared by the Academic Committee to formulate a procedure for renewal of contract, promotions and for hiring of new faculty. The report was discussed at length. Dr. Nityanand suggested that for HOD positions, it may be worthwhile to have 3 years rotation period as it is followed by some of the IITs in India and is working very well. Prof. Harkishan Singh was of the view that the rotation system has also some
regards. Dr Rama Rao suggested that as regards renewal of contracts every 5 years, the validity of this contract is only for one term. All the members of the Board felt that since this will become a very important document for the future, it may need some time to make a final set of regulations for this activity. Since many members were not present in the meeting, the Director was asked to seek the opinion of all the Board members regarding the procedures prepared by the Academic committee and have their views and place before the Board in its next meeting scheduled in January, 1999, so that a final document can be prepared.
21st BOG Meeting
Agenda Item 3:
A lot of concern was shown by all the members regarding filling of the faculty positionsat NIPER. Although the institute has advertised twice in the last year in all the states butthe response of suitable candidates is not satisfactory. The chairman suggested thatwe should relax some of the qualifications, experience, age etc. in order to fill some ofthe faculty positions. Prof. Harishen Singh was of the view that it may not be desirable tofill the vacancy with people who are not suitably qualified. Shri Sood suggested that willit not be possible for NIPER to recruit fresh people and train them for the job. TheDirector was of the view that it may not be possible to do this exercise since this willinvolve lot of time and may not yield the desired results. Shri N.S.Rattan suggested thatthe recruitment of faculty is an universal problem faced by all the premier institutes in
the country. He suggested that they are thinking of recruiting some freshly retiredpeople for fixed period of time in some of the Engineering Colleges in the state tocombat with the immediate problem. The Director was asked to see some of thepeople in various pharmacy schools in India personally and see whether we can attractsome people for a short term basis on fixed remunerations. The Director informed theBoard that at present we have hired about 15-20 external faculty for some of the courses of various subjects on fixed remuneration of Rs.250/- per hour. Prof. HarkishenSingh suggested that this remuneration seems to be quite low and it may not bepossible for us to attract people with this type of compensation. The Chairmansuggested that we could increase this remuneration as long as we can get some goodpeople. Another suggestion was to attract some overseas candidates who could visitNIPER on sabbatical leave for a period of 6 months to 1 year and the Director wasasked to make enquires in this direction also. The Chairman suggested that we canthink of hiring some external people by offering higher remunerations. He asked theDirector to work in this direction and put up a proposal for the same if some persons areidentified. He further suggested that when we go to the Planning Commission fordiscussing the plan next year we should make sure that we have reasonable number offaculty added to NIPER. It was very difficult for the Board to draw up any definite policyfor the attraction of the faculty but asked the Director to make all the efforts bothnationally and internationally to hasten the process of recruitment.

Supplementary Agenda Item 1:
The Director informed that Board that the Ministry of Human Resource Developmentthrough their Circular No. F-1-22/97-U.1 dated 27th July, 1998 has fixed the age ofsuperannuation for University and College teachers at 62 years. The same has beenimplemented by the IITs,PGIMER and AIIMS. It is therefore well in order that the age ofsuperannuation for the NIPER faculty be fixed at 62 years. With the above change, itfollows that the age of superannuation for the Director should also be raised to 65 years.The Board discussed the matter in length and approved the same.The meeting ended with a vote of thanks to the Chair.

1. Sh. D. Chatterjee, IAS Chairman
2. Sh. S.K. Sood, IAS Member
3. Sh. N.S. Rattan, IAS Member
4. Prof. Harkishen Singh Member
5. Sh. S.K.Sharma, FA Member
6. Dr C.L. Kaul, Member/Secretary
22nd BOG Meeting
Agenda Item 1:
The minutes of 21st meeting of the Board of Governors of NIPER held on 09-02-1999 were approved. While considering the approval of the minutes of the Board ofGovernors meeting, Dr Rama Rao raised a point regarding the upper age limit forsupperannuation of the Director. The Chairman said that this would be looked into.
Agenda Item 3:
The revised pay scales of NIPER faculty as per IIT’s Scales were approved. New grades have to be considered effective from 8th of July, 1998, the date on which NIPER Act come into force.
Agenda Item 4:
The issue of appointment of new faculty was discussed. Some of the members desiredto have details of the academic record of the selected candidates. It was discussedthat Director should put up a detailed note in this regard for consideration at the nextmeeting.
Agenda Item 5:
The approval for the renewal of the contracts of the faculty working at NIPER wasdiscussed. It was decided that Director may put up a detailed note in this regard alsofor consideration at the next meeting.
Agenda Item 6:
The Director placed the recommendation of the academic committee regardingselection procedures of the faculty and the career advancement scheme for thefaculty members in position.

23rd BOG Meeting
Agenda Item 1:
As desired by the Chairman, the Director presented the details of recruitment of newfaculty members who have been selected by the Selection Committee. DrNityaNandmentioned that a great deal of time has been spent originally in screening theapplications and short listing the candidates for interview. He further mentioned thatduring the first 3-4 years the response to the faculty position is fairly large as comparedto many other institutes in the country. The Chairman asked the Director as to how theselection of the applicants is carried out in absentia. The Director informed the Boardthat this is normally done by getting reference of the candidates and in some cases themembers of the selection committee are aware of the credentials of these candidates
and based on these parameter, the selection is being carried out in absentia. After alot of discussion the appointment of the following candidates was approved on a basicsalary as indicated, subject to that these does not create any disparity between theexisting faculty. The Director was asked to look into this matter and make properadjustment.
Name Position offered Basic PayRecommended (Rs.)
Natural Products:
Dr Sanjay JachakAssistant Professor 12750/-
Pharmacology & Toxicology :
Dr Mohan PamarthiAssociate Professor 15650/-
DrMukulR.JainAssistant Professor 12750/-
DrShyamS.SharmaAssistant Professor12000/-
Pharmaceutical Technology:
Dr Uma Ramachandran Associate Professor 15650/-
Dr Deepak D.PoondiAssistant Professor 12750/-
Dr Rajeev S.Raguvanshi Assistant Professor 12750/-
DrSukhM.SinghAssociate Professor With salary
Dr Sanjeev K.MendirattaAssistant Professor 13125/-
Agenda Item 2:
The appointment of MrSundaramMudaliar as Registrar was approved on deputationfor a period of 2 years as desired by the applicant.
Agenda Item 3:
The Director presented details of the procedure followed for renewal of the contractforexisting NIPER faculty who have completed more than 4 years of service. He alsopresented a brief summary of each faculty member as regards their achievements inacademic field, fund mobilization and teaching performance. Dr Rama Rao raised apoint in one or two instances where the titles of research papers published by thefaculty members were not given and it was suggested that the concerned facultyshould be informed about the same. After a lot of discussions the renewal of the
following faculty members was approved for a period of another 5 years or upto theage of 62 years whichever is earlier.The renewal will be effective from the date theycompletes 5 years term.
1.       DrH.P.S.Chawla
2.       DrK.K.Bhutani
3.       DrC.S.Dey
4.       DrA.K.Chakraborti
5.       DrP.Rama Rao
6.       DrSaranjit Singh
7.       DrR.Panchagnula
Agenda Item 4:
As regards the approval of the payment of arrears to Prof. H.P.S.Chawla, the Boarddiscussed this point in detail and suggested that since NIPER has been declared as anInstitute of National Importance only on 8th July, 1998, payment of arrears can be madeonly from that date and not from the original appointment. The Chairman emphasizedthat since we have approved IITs grade for rest of the faculty from the date of thenotification (8th July, 1998), it will be pertinent to pay the arrear to Prof. Chawla also fromthe date of notification in the Government Gazette.
Agenda Item 5:
The Director presented the recommendation of the Academic Committee as regardsthe promotional policy and procedure for assessment of faculty members. The Directoralso informed the Board that some of the extra items have also been included in thisnote just to make the note comprehensive. He further suggested that it will beimportant to incorporate all the recommendations in the statutes of the Institute whichare being scrutinized by the Ministry at present so that all these information will be atone place. The Board after some discussion approved the same and suggested thatthe points from these recommendations should form part of the statutes.
1. Sh. D.Chaterjee, IAS Chairman
2. Sh. Ashok Chawla, IAS Member
3. DrNityaNand Member
4. Prof. Harishen Singh Member
5. DrA.V.Rama Rao Member
6. Sh.S.N.Khanna OPPI Representative
7. Sh.S.K.Sharma Invitee
8. DrC.L.Kaul Member/Secretary

24th BOG Meeting
The Board observed that Dr. C.L.Kaul, was appointed as Director for a duration offive year upto 31st August, 1999 and he will be completing the age of 63 years inOctober, 1999.After due deliberations and keeping in view the progress of completion of NIPERproject and overall performance of Dr. C.L.Kaul, the Board of Governors resolved torecommend appointment of Dr. C.L.Kaul, as Director, NIPER for two years with effectfrom 1st September, 1999, it was also decided that a Search Committee to appointed inthe next meeting of the Board of Governors so as to take steps for appointment of a newDirector, well before expiry of the extended tenure of two years.
25th BOG Meeting
Agenda Item No.1:
While approving the minutes of 23rd and 24th meeting of BOG held on 24-05-1999 and06-07-1999 respectively, the Chairman observed that only the final consensus arrived atby the BOG he recorded in the minutes in future. Some members observed thatapproval for the minutes of meeting should be taken in the next meeting itself withoutallowing them to be in arrears. Chairman further observed that the each agenda itemshould contain at the end the resolution to be passed by the BOG.
Agenda Item No.2:
The minutes of the 40th, 41st and 42nd meeting of EFC and BWC held on 09-02-1999, 20-04-1999 and 13-7-1999 respectively were approved.
26th BOG Meeting
BOG noted the action taken on the minutes of the 25th meeting of the BOG aspresented. DrNityaNand informed the Committee that DrMashelkar has agreed to bethe Chairman of the Search Committee for selection of new Director for NIPER.Chairman observed that while constituting the Search Committee, the instructions ofD.O.P&T, Government of India on the subject would be kept in view. He furtherobserved that review of the action taken on the decisions of at least 3 meeting previousto the last one should be put up at the next meeting of BOG.
After discussing the issues threadbare, the BOG suggested the EFC may explore thefeasibility of notional adoption of IIT pay scales w.e.f. 01-01-1996 with financial benefitfrom 08-07-1998 for the existing faculty of NIPER and the matter brought thereafter toBOG for consideration.
After perusing the proposal the BOG felt that the existing stipulation of Clause 12 of NIPER Recruitment Rules may stand without any amendment.
27th BOG Meeting
Agenda Item No. 3 & 4:
The Board approved the minutes of the 8th Academic Committee Meeting and theappointment of Prof. H.P.S.Chawla as Dean of the Institute. As regards the variousentitlements of the Dean, it was agreed that they need to be ascertained from IIT. Prof.Harkishen Singh raised a point regarding streamlining these entitlements for variouspeople in the Institute like Director, Registrar, Warden etc. It was decided that aproposal, based on the position in IITs, be put up in the next BOG meeting forconsideration. As and when approved they should form part of the Statutes of theInstitute.
Agenda Item No.5:
The Chairman informed the Board that the Ministry is taking necessary steps regardingthe selection of Director, NIPER.
Agenda Item No.7:
The Board approved the appointment of the following faculty members in variousDepartments.
Sr. No. Name of candidate Position offered Pay Scale StartingBasicPay
1. DrAnupK.Mukhopadhyay Associate Professor 16400-450-20000 17300/-
2. DrNiranjan Das Assistant Professor 12000-420-18300 12000/-
Natural Products
1. DrU.V.Mallavadhani Associate Professor 16400-450-20000 17300/-
Pharmaceutical Technology
1. DrU.C.Banerjee Professor 18400-500-22400 18400/-
2. DrAbhey Deshpande Associate Professor 16400-450-20000 17300/-
3. DrArvindK.Bansal Assistant Professor 12000-420-18300 12840/-

It was, however, pointed out by the Director that, based on the background ofDrU.C.Banerjee, it would be better that Dr Banerjee is made Professor in the Departmentof Biotechnology rather than Pharmaceutical Technology. This was agreed to. Prof.Harkishen Singh raised a point regarding making Dr Banerjee, Professor and Head of theDepartment of Biotechnology. The Director felt that it will be desirable to see theworking of Dr Banerjee for a couple of years before he is appointed as Head of theDepartment.
Agenda Item No.8:
The Board approved the promotions of the following faculty members:
Sr.No. Name Present Positions Promoted to Department
1. DrK.K.Bhutani Associate Professor, Prof. & Head NaturalProducts
2. DrP.Rama Rao Associate Professor, Prof. &Head Pharmacology
& Toxicology
3. Dr Ramesh Panchagnula Associate Professor Prof. & Head Pharmaceutics
4. DrSaranjit Singh Associate Professor Prof. & Head Pharmaceutical
5. DrA.K.Chakraborti Assistant Professor AssociateProfessorMedicinal
6. DrC.S.Dey Assistant Professor AssociateProfessorBiotechnology
These promotions would be effective from the day the candidate completed 5 years ofservice. The seniority of these incumbents will remain the same as in the present grade.
Agenda Item No.11:
Shri Sharad Gupta referred to the proposal for implementation of IIT grades at NIPER forthe Faculty and the Director. He informed the Board that the matter was discussed atlength in the EFC meeting held on 9th February, 2000. After discussion, it was agreedthat the NIPER faculty should be based on the IIT grades and that they should becomeoperative from 1-1-1996, since the notification of the Ministry of Human ResourceDevelopment on the revision of pay scales (F.No.23-5/96-TS.1) does not include only theInstitute of national importance but also the centres of excellence, NIPER being onesuch Institute, grades should be operative from 1-1-1996. The IIT scales approved forNIPER are as under:
Nomenclature of Post Revised pay scale w.e.f. 1-1-1996 (in Rs.)
Assistant Professor 12000-420-18300/-
Associate Professor 16400-450-20000/-
Professor 18400-500-22400/-
Director 25000 (Fixed)

28th BOG Meeting
The Board ratified the action taken on points 3 to 6 and 9. As regards point No.7, it wasdecided to modify the contents as hitherto: In the offers of appointment sent to Dr.A.K.Mukhopadhyay and Dr. U.V.Mallavdhani, the starting basic pay has been kept atminimum of the scale to ensure pay-parity between the existing faculty and newappointees.
As regards Point No.8, it was pointed out by Prof. Harkishan Singh that if the word“appointment” is used instead of the word “promotion” in respect of the facultymembers under reference, it implies fresh appointments as Associate Professors andProfessors. In that case what would be the position of benefits of services rendered atthe lower scale. Director pointed that as per clause 4 (1) (a) of NIPER recruitment Rules approved by BOG in its 10th meeting held on 04-12-1995. “Except for the consequencesof being on contract, the posts filled on contract shall accrue all the benefits ofpermanency”, that this implies that past service benefits will be protected. Shri SharadGupta opined that since appointments will deemed to be afresh, past service benefitsstand forfeited. However, DrNityaNand informed that in the Department of Space,these benefits were applicable in case of contractual service. He added that even inCSIR, when the contract system was prevailing, such benefits were applicable. The Chairman ruled that a copy of the procedure being followed in CSIR as well as in the Department of Space may be obtained to resolve the matter.
Shri N.S.Rattan, Principal Secretary, Department of Technical Education, Punjab raisedthe issue that in various teaching institutions, the appointment of Head of theDepartment was by rotation, hence, the same system may be considered for NIPER.However, the Chairman opined that in new establishments like NIPER, the hierarchicalstructure in respect of faculty position should be maintained. It was also pointed byProf. Harkishan Singh and DrNityaNand that wherever it has existed, the rotation systemhad proved to be counter-productive.
As regards Point No.10, the Chairman informed that he could not talk to DrManjuSharma, Secretary, Department of Biotechnology in the matter and indicated that aftersoon doing so, he would inform the Director of the outcome of his discussion.
APPROVAL FOR ADOPTION OF IIT GRADES OF SCALES OF PAY FOR OTHER GROUP ‘A’OFFICERS (EXCEPT FACULTIES) OF NIPER.The Director presented the circular of Ministry of HRD giving details of Administrative posts to be upgraded on IIT pattern. He suggested that there was no document to
substantiate the qualification and experience etc. required for this purpose. Sh. SharadGupta was doubtful whether BOG had the power to approve the upgraded scales ornot.Sh.N.S.Rattan was of the opinion that since BOG had approved the IIT Scales for thefaculty, on the same analogy, the scales of pay of the Administrative Staff may also beapproved. DrNityaNand emphasized the desirability of NIPER adopting the scales asapplicable in IITs. Sh. Sharad Gupta and Sh. S.K.Sharma said that the qualification,experience and other criteria may be different in IIT as compared to NIPER Dr. NityaNand was of the opinion that the proposal should be accepted in principle. TheChairman ruled that we could adopt the scales subject to the condition that thequalifications and experience were the same as laid down by IIT; information shouldalso be sought if any category other than the categories under reference was alsoaffected. Sh.N.S.Rattan informed that special scales had been adopted by IIT for facultyand Admn Officers under reference; for the rest of the staff, scales as recommended bythe 5th Central Pay Commission were applicable.
Director:The BOG authorized the Chairman and DrNityaNand to decide the matter regardingthe facilities etc. of Director, NIPER.
Dean:As regards the facilities to Dean, the following entitlements were approved:
a) Licence fee free but unfurnished accommodation in the campus.
b) An honorarium of Rs.900/- (Rs.Nine Hundred Only) per month.
c) Staff car facility in connection with official work only.
Registrar:The Chairman ruled that as and when a final decision was taken on the admissibility ofthe IIT scale for Registrar extending the other facilities could be then considered.
The BOG authorized the Chairman and DrNityaNand to decide this matter regardingthe Warden.
The BOG desired that the nomenclature of various grades of Stenographers at IIT maybe obtained before a decision is taken on the issue. DrNityaNand underlined thenecessity implementing the assured career promotion scheme available at IITs inrespect of all employees.
Any other item with the permission of the Chair.
(a) The Director pointed out that draft statutes of the Institute were sent to theDepartment of Chemicals &Petrochemicals about one year back for perusaland comments. After perusal by DC & PC, the statutes were required to beput up before BOG for approval. However, the said statutes had not beenreceived from DC& PC as yet. The Chairman instructed Shri S.K.Sharma toexpedite the matter.
29th BOG Meeting
The Board noted the action taken on Points 1, 2A, 2B, 2C, 4, 6, 7, 8, 9, 11A, 11b, 12 and 13C. In so far as item 10 A of the minutes of the last meeting is concerned, the chairman drew attention to the recommendation of the Committee comprising Dr. Nityanand and himself dated July 13, 2000. this
Committee has recommended the following facilities and perquisites for the Director of NIPER.
a) License fee-free, furnished accommodation. The furnishings, interalia, would include Sofa set,Dining table, four Beds, six Central tables, two Air conditioners, Refrigerator, one Carpet,Curtains for all rooms, fans, Exhaust fans as required and two Coolers, apart from Officefurniture for one room.
b) Car for official and personal purposes as per GOI orders on the subject.
c) Official direct line telephone with STD/ISD facilities both at the residence and the office.
d) Contingency grant for books @ Rs. 7,500/- per year, subject to the condition that the books willultimately form part of the Institute library.
e) Reimbursement of 75% membership fee of one international professional society.
f) Financial assistance for attending national conference, TA/DA and registration fee once in afinancial year as also for attending one International Conference in three years.
In respect of the warden, the Committee recommended that the incumbent be entitled to licensefeefree, unfurnished accommodation, apart from honorarium as decided by the Board of governorsfrom time to time; and that the honorarium be fixed at Rs. 800/- per month at present. The Committee
had also recommended that all the above recommendations be given to from August 01, 2000.
The board of governors approved the aforesaid recommendations.
29th BOG Meeting
The Board observed that the qualifications and experience prescribed by NIPER were better ascompared to those of IIT in respect of other Group “A” Officers posts in question. Hence, it wasdecided to retain these existing qualifications and experience for NIPER. Subject to the above, the
Board approved adoption of IIT grades and pattern of cadre structure with appropriate pay of scaledfor other group “A” Officers (except faculties of NIPER) to be adopted from 1/8/2000.

Wednesday 23 March 2016

NIPER Mohali faces CBI for same (innovations and IPR management in pharma))!!!!!

NIPER Hyderabad's conference focused on innovations and IPR management in pharma

Tuesday, March 22, 2016, 15:30 Hrs  [IST]
The National Institute of Pharmaceutical Education and Research (NIPER) Hyderabad's conference on ‘Innovations in Pharmaceuticals and Intellectual Property Rights (IPR) management' organised from 21-22 March focused on various issues relating to pharmaceutical industry in the country. The two-day conference discussed issues pertaining to startup industries in pharma and IPR management. It also discussed on various contemporary issues and emerging trends driving the industry and future scope for development.

According to Dr. Ahmed Kamal, project director, NIPER Hyderabad, fostering industry-academy relations is very important for improving research and encouraging innovations in the pharmaceutical industry. As part of this initiative, NIPER Hyderabad is collaborating with the industry in various projects. “Industry-academia relations will help the upcoming graduates to have a firsthand experience of various issues in the industry. It also encourages new research and helps students to come up with innovative ideas and discover new drugs,” observed Dr. Ahmed.

Dr Shraddha Chowdhary, convener of the conference introduced the keynote speaker Utkarsh Palnitkar, national head life sciences practice, KPMG. Palnitkar, in his keynote address, highlighted the positive and the negative dimensions of the present approach to innovation. Innovate or perish was his mantra. He, while complementing that India was leader in ANDA domain, also suggested a reduction in the number of regulators. In this context, he described NIPER as nurturing innovation in pharmaceuticals for entrepreneurial rejuvenation.

M Gopalakrishna, chief guest of the occasion, stressed the need for youngsters to become innovative entrepreneurs. Quoting extensively from various texts, he indicated the need to have a mindset with quench for knowledge. Democracy, demography, diversity, diaspora and demand were India’s advantages that need to be exploited. Clarity of concept, content and context were in his view essentials for innovation. He extolled the academia and industry to come together, identify gaps and work in a collaborative fashion and move towards global excellence.

The ‘Startup India’ session was in tune with government of India’s Make in India initiative. The speakers in the first sessions included Javin Bhinde, Kiran Das, Dr Radhika Meenakshi Shankar, G. Bharat Kumar and Kirtida Desai. They spoke about the make in India initiative and appreciated the fact that the government was playing a role that will help drive investment, foster innovation, develop skills, protect IP and build best-in-class manufacturing infrastructure.

The session on ‘Innovations in Pharmaceutical Management’ had Vivek Padgaonkar, Ameesh Masurekar and Pramod Bhatt as the speakers. In this session, they focused on various innovations that were part of the industry’s foray into the future. Panel discussion on ‘Skill Gap Analysis’ by speakers like P Dinakaran, Dr Sanjit Singh Lamba, Dr Madhav Welling, Dr Ajit Parulekar, Sudheendra Kulkarni from the industry and academia focused on key skill gap to address in the healthcare industry. Mostly it revolved around awareness, capacity building and proper treatment.

Thursday 17 March 2016

Why Mr. Jena lied to Lok Sabha?

In response to the Lok Sabha Question NO 4231 on Financial Irregularities in NIPER


(a) whether the Government/Board of Governors of National Institute of Pharmaceutical Education and Research (NIPER) have written complaints regarding financial irregularities including the non-approval of Budget estimates for 2012-13, especially for NIPER, SAS Nagar, Punjab;

Hon'ble MOS, DOP Ministry of C&F Srikant Jena replied NO Madam

Meaning, Government/Board of Governors of National Institute of Pharmaceutical Education and Research (NIPER) have not received any written complaints regarding financial irregularities

Paper available with us are in the contrary of the answer.

Several complains have registered with Minister, MOS, Secretary, Joint secretary who is Chief Vigilance Officer of the department & who also happens to be member of BoG, NIPER; by faculty members of NIPER as well as their famaly members.

Moreover complains are also lodged with Chairman BOG, by faculty members. Even a requisitioned meeting is also called in the issue by four BOG members see attached documents. 

Now question is why Mr.Jena is lying to Lok Sabha?

On Wednesday, June 06, 2012 9:05 AM one Hon'ble BOG member wrote


Dear Chairman,

Ref: Our letter dated 28.05.12 to convene a special BOG meeting as per NIPER Statute clause # 3.31.3[b].

NAMASKAR. This is to remind the chairman that a letter was submitted to the Chairman on 28.05.2012, the day of last BOG meeting held in NIPER, Mohali, signed by four BOG members to hold a special BOG meeting to discuss the various issues haunting the NIPER, Mohali in order to answer Questions posed in the Parliament of India regarding the failure and break down of administrative and academic system of NIPER, Mohali. As per the clause # 3.1.3[b], the meeting need be convened within 15 days from the date of submission of letter. Therefore, we request sincerely the Chairman to announce the date at the earliest.

Thanking you.
Yours sincerely

A copy of our letter dated 28.05.12 (in attachment)
Copy to
1. The President of India, Visitor of NIPER, Mohali, Punjab, India. 
2. The Honorable Minister of Chemicals and Fertilizers, Government of India, New Delhi. 
3. All BOG members, NIPER, Mohali, Punjab, India.

In response to the letter of Chairman 
On Friday, June 08, 2012 12:22 PM BOG One member replied:----------

Dear Dr. Katoch,
Thanks for conveying the Requisition Meeting, tentatively on 28th June, 2012 in New Delhi:-
“To discuss Unstarred Question no. 1912 on 30th March, 2012 in the Rajya Sabha, wherein a report from the BOG is being sought by the Government regarding breakdown of systems & procedures in the NIPER, Mohali and take remedial steps.”

Your contention that you appraised the BOG Members regarding letter no. 50017/3/2012-NIPER dated 10th April, 2012 w.r.t. Rajya Sabha Unstarred Question Admitted No. 1912 is unfounded. There is no reason as to why this important communication to the Board was not placed as a part of the Agenda of the 57th BOG as it was received well in advance. This shows the arrogance and aristocratic prejudice on the part of the dyfunctional NIPER administration in an abject bid to cover up malpractices and undermine the sanctity of the Parliament, enshrined in our constitution.

Your remarks that you are very clear about your role, that the BOG has to ponder over collectively and we need to work with neutrality and objectively to strengthen the functioning & image of the NIPER has never been forcefully put to practiceing the BOG meetings chaired by you till now. 

Issue of appointment of the Regular Director has been dragged for over a year while the tenure of this BOG is only for a period of three years. 

Important issues like CAG observations, Budget for 2012- 2013, and lack of internal Audit Systems have also led to the need for requisitioning a Special meeting, in the history of the NIPER for the first time. 

Non functioning of departmental & statutory committees tantamounts to breaking down of the laid down systems & procedures leading to mal– administration including delay in imparting justice as well as victimisation in several instances whichhave led to filing of litigation cases, and such serious lapses on the part of the NIPER administration have also never been discussed in the BOG Agendas.

The allegations on the blog “Biped Against Corruption” has already listed lot of serious allegations and therefore, on behalf of the Board, you should direct the NIPER Administration to give their response item-wise of their side of the picture supported by documents. 

The Board after sorting out the issues could hold a BOG Meeting where the accuser and the NIPER Administration/persons against whom the allegations have been made could present their views before the BOG. 

The findings of the BOG should be tabulated into the report and submitted to the Parliament of India to fulfill the assurances of Department of Pharmaceuticals.

Please ensure that the background papers, response to the NIPER should be made available to the BOG members at least seven days in advance before the schedule of Meeting.