Guest lecturers’ body allege anomalies in recruitment process of Assistant Professors

Members of Tamil Nadu All Government College UGC Qualified Guest Lecturers’ Association have alleged anomalies in the process of recruitment of Assistant Professors to government and government-aided arts and science colleges in the State.

They said that marks allotted by the Teachers’ Recruitment Board (TRB) against teaching experience to two of the candidates were found to be higher in the provisional selection list released after certificate verification and interview when compared to the mark list released after the exam. Both the candidates were selected and handed over appointment letters on March 13.

According to V. Thangaraj, State President of the Guest Lecturers’ Association, the anomalies were noticed in the candidates’ lists for Marine Biology and Wildlife Biology departments. He said that as per the mark list released on February 25, prior to certificate verification and interview, M. Ashokkumar was given zero marks for experience. But as per the provisional selection list released on March 12 (after certificate verification and interview), he was allotted 15 marks for experience. Similarly, M. Santhanakrishnan was awarded 11 marks for experience in the mark list while in the provisional selection list for Marine Biology department, he was given 13 marks.

The TRB had conducted the examination for recruitment of 2,708 Assistant Professors for 48 subjects on December 27, 2025 where as many as 42,064 candidates appeared. Among these, candidates for five of the subjects – History Education, Culture and Tourism, Human Rights, Marine Biology, and Wildlife Biology – were called for certificate verification and interview on March 11 and 12 and the selected candidates were handed over appointment letters the next day.

For the rest of the 43 subjects, the mark list was released by TRB on June 25. A few striking issues were noticed here as well, Mr. Thangaraj pointed out. For example, one of the candidates secured 49 marks in Paper II (descriptive answers) out of a total of 50, although she got 54 in Paper I Part B (multiple choice questions) out of a total of 150. Similarly, another candidate did not score any marks in the descriptive paper while having scored 111 in the MCQ paper.

There is a need for transparency in the evaluation of the exam papers, Mr. Thangaraj observed. He believed that a positive step towards reforming the recruitment system would be to do away with the interview process and make the examination the final selection point for the candidates.