வழக்கின் விவரம்:
மதுரை அமேரிக்கன் கல்லூரியில் முதுகலை மைக்ரோ பயாலாஜி பயின்ற மனுதாரர் ஒருவர் தனது படிப்பு முதுகலை தாவரவியல் பட்டத்துக்கு இணையானது
இல்லை என்று கூறி சான்றிதல் சரிபார்ப்பில் நிராகரிக்கப்பட்டுள்ளதை எதிர்த்து மனுதாக்கல் செய்திருந்தார்.மனுதாரர் சார்பில் வழக்கறிஞர் தாழை முத்தரசன் ஆஜராகி வாதிட்டார்.மனுவை விசாரித்த நீதிபதி அம்மனுவுக்கு பதில் தாக்கல் செய்ய ஆசிரியர் தேர்வு வாரியத்துக்கு உத்தரவிட்டு வழக்குவிசாரணையை ஒத்திவைத்ததாக தகவல்கள் தெரிவிக்கின்றன.
due to equvalabce read d prospectus govt also passedd g.o. for equvalance still now what is he doing read prospectud and go to d court
ReplyDeleteDo you have any sense Mr Madurai American college microbiology candidate....how is microbiology equivalent to botany....olunga prospects ah padingada muttal pasangala....this time trb separately alloted microbiology posting...so what are you doing...neengala ur subject vittudu then yenda aduthavan. Subject ku aasapaduringa...neengalaam irunta maatngala
ReplyDeleteithana nala engada poirundhinga. unaku kandipa vela kedaikadhuda en sabam palikum paruda. final list ungalaladhanda delay agudhu. poi tholaingada
ReplyDeleteepdi pesanumgra thaguthiye ungakitta neengalam teacher velaikku poi ennatha kilikka poringa poi maadu vangi meinga ungalukku kandippa velai kidaikkadhu po
Deletei am prabavathi from karur
Deletene poi madu mei. ne panakarana irupa ne own na kastapattu sampadhichu padichadhan avara madhiri irukaravanga kastam unaku therium. po poi velaya paru. unaku vela kedaikadhu kalam muluka kastapatadhan anga madhiri alunga kastam unaku puriyum
Deleteto whom u r blaming.... case filled person of commenting person??????????
Deleteto whom u r blaming.... case filled person or commenting person??????????
Deletecommenting person only
DeleteYaara solluringa....second coment candidate or case filed candidate.please tell
ReplyDeleteDEAR PGA ASPIRANTS, THE STUDENT FROM The American College, Madurai is not a PG degree holder in Microbiology. His degree is M.Sc Botany (Specialization Microbiology). There was no issue at all for these type of specialization courses till previous years. The basal degree is botany only. Asking GOs for specialization courses is very pathetic and ridiculing the academic freedom of institutions. When engineering courses dominated over arts and science streams, these type of innovative courses lured the students to study science subjects, especially the more pathetic Botany and Zoology. These courses are UGC funded, departments undergone radical changes, modern labs, latest books, all are provided for the benefit of the students. Now, the issue of equivalence kills the very spirit of forming these courses. The departments providing these specialization courses are nearly 50 years old, the courses are government funded. Specializations are provided for luring the students towards the subject.
ReplyDeletePlease read the analogy
Advertisement: We need poets.
Statement: I am a poet (also a singer)
View 1: He is a poet
View 2: He is a singer too
View 3: If you are a singer then you are not a poet.
Unfortunately, the government takes the third view and makes the candidates ineligible.
More over these courses are started 15 to 20 years back. Where the government was gone all during these years. The problem of equivalence came on the context of some of the universities providing degrees in different names M.Sc Life Sciences (spl Animal Science), can anybody guess what is this course??, it is M.Sc Zoology!!. The degree is ambiguous, so they have to provide GO as this course is equivalent to this course. The degree awarded to the The American College candidate is Master of science in Botany (Microbiology) and TRB is asking M.Sc Botany is equivalent to M.Sc Botany???!!!!
ReplyDeleteHats off! nice explanation.Meritorious candidates are rejected even after clearing TRB on equivalence ground.This is really pathetic.This pg teachers are only to teach basic concepts in relevant subject to +2 students.The purpose of GO 1999 is to avoid the entry of cross major candidates but treating specialized degree holder at par with cross major degree holders is totally wrong and defeats the intention of the GO.Government officials should consider this points.Court has given judgement in favor of special degree holders but government is still reluctant to give appointment to the affected candidates.
DeleteThe candidate is not illegally competing with anybody. When a department started 50 years ago, where one or two colleges in all over Tamilnadu having the course(The American College, Madurai was one of the very few colleges in Tamilnadu started many Postgraduate courses a half a century ago), then who is the competitor. Some 30 years back, the course was plain M.Sc Botany or M.Sc Zoology, now it provides specializations. Our government needs only plain dosas, not special dosas. One department, one course. The students have no choice, if they want to study botany (The American College) then the specialization is automatically awarded to them. To join these courses, a student should undergo an entrance examination to compete with at least 100 students from his own college and other colleges.
ReplyDeletegood explanation..... the deserving person should be given the post.
DeleteActually he is not from microbiology. His subject is M.Sc Botany (Specialization in Microbiology).
ReplyDeletepls dont use hard words.these are hurt to those commenters. in this democracy nation all have same writes. they ask their writes.dont blame them. By one of the canditates who waiting for final list.
ReplyDeleteNot only that college sivaganga rdm college,v.h.n.s.n college specialization with sericulture,yadava college m.sc zoology spl with aquaculture and farm management.these college functions like this name of courses but degree awarded in general botany or zoology .the convocation should be like so and so studied m.sc botany in the year only acceptable.that college degree is general botany only.
ReplyDeleteVery nice explanation Mr Ganesh Really admiring & hh claims his right none can deny that pg cv attend fellows b patient if man gives u may afraid if God gives none can stop that Let them ask their rights if it is genuine like this
ReplyDeletewhen will publish the trb final list.
ReplyDeleteTrb pg tamil madurai high court case ennachu,court hereing vanthuda elliah soluga freinds
ReplyDeletePlz update any news about pg trb final list friends
ReplyDeleteis there any chances for increasing no of posts in pgtrb this year I mean 2nd list
ReplyDeleteganesh sir I think your major is zoolog y is there any changes in zoology key
ReplyDeleteகககபோ
Deletesir I cant understand
Deleteஇம்சை அரசன் 23ஆம் புலிகேசி பாக்கலியா?????
Deletein pg trb for what reasons they are filing cases???
DeleteThese are the major issues to file cases in HH
Delete1. To get the required cutoff marks, challenging the answers given by TRB.
2. Equivalence problems (Provisional list candidates)
so marks change aahuma
DeleteSir, Next year PG TRB exam irukka , commerce vanacy varuma? pls tell me, I want to prepare for exam from now.
ReplyDeletePG TRB postings increase pannuvangala?any chance to get the job from second list candidates?
ReplyDeletepaadasalai website comments la pg vacancy 900 increae panniyirukkirada sorangale unmaiya????
ReplyDeleteYes..,But that is not a confirm news.(It may be a rumor)
DeleteKALVI MALAR NEWS ON 7/11/2013
ReplyDeleteHC Bench disposes batch of writ petitions by PG Asst candidates-11/7/2013
Font Size :
Print Email
< size=2>
Madurai: Madras High Court Bench disposed of a batch of writ petitions filed by Post Graduate Assistant Candidates,seeking revaluation of papers and staying provisional list of certificate verification and directed Teachers recruitment board to
The petitioners had also sought award of marks for wrong questions/wrong key answers given by Teachers Recruitment Board after hearing views of experts (Asssitant Professors) from Government Colleges at Chennai.
Justice S Nagamuthu, disposing petitions filed by Commerce, Science, Mathematics and History PG Assistant teacher aspirants, directed TRB to allot one mark each if key answers given by the board were wrong for the questions or if the questions themselves were incomplete (as in one or two cases).
The Petitioners submitted they had given right answers, while the final key given was wrong and that in some cases two options (Answers) given for objective type of questions were correct and they could choose only one. In others, questions themselves were incomplete.
The candidates sought from between one to six marks for discrepancies between the tentative Key answers given by TRB and final key answers.
The Judge had summoned the experts and sought their opinion on the Key final answers. They opined that many of the answers given in the key answer were correct and there were mistakes too in some questions.
The Judge cross verified the opinion with the textbooks and directed TRB to give one mark to the petitioners (only) if the experts felt it should be given and disposed the cases.
TRB Member secretary Asundhara Devi contended that final key answers were right as they were published only after recording candidates' objections and sending them for expert opinion and sought dismissal of the petitions.
TRB contended the order to revalue the paper would derail the entire recruitment process and cause irreparable loss to candidates. It would also delay appointment process and affect the academic prospects of students.