Medical education experts demand redesignation of MS, DMS and AMS strictly in line with Teachers Eligibility Qualifications
STC NEWS DESK
SRINAGAR, MAY 01 (STC): Re-designation of Medical Superintendents as Professors, Deputy Medical Superintendents as Associate Professors, and Assistant Medical Superintendents as Assistant Professors in the Government Medical Colleges of Jammu and Kashmir has created unrest among the doctor’s fraternity, said sources privy to the situation.
It has been reliably learnt that
the proposal is currently under consideration and experts said the matter has significant academic, regulatory, and institutional implications, particularly with respect to compliance during statutory inspections and the maintenance of standards in medical education.
Notably, As per the Teachers Eligibility Qualifications (TEQ) Regulations, 2022 and related norms issued by the National Medical Commission, faculty appointments in medical colleges are strictly governed by clearly defined eligibility criteria. These include possession of a recognized postgraduate qualification in the concerned subject, specified years of teaching experience in a recognized institution, and mandatory research publications for higher academic positions such as Associate Professor and Professor.
The rules envisage that the academic designations are conferred on the basis of individual eligibility, demonstrated teaching experience, and scholarly contribution, and not by virtue of holding administrative or managerial posts.
The positions of Medical Superintendent, Deputy Medical Superintendent, and Assistant Medical Superintendent are primarily administrative in nature, involving hospital operations, resource management, and service delivery oversight, sources said and added that these roles, while critical to hospital functioning, are distinct from academic faculty positions that require structured teaching responsibilities, curriculum engagement, and research output.
Sources further stated that the regulatory position consistently maintains a separation between administrative and academic roles. In fact, the usual pathway recognized under NMC norms is that a faculty member, already fulfilling academic criteria, may be appointed as Medical Superintendent; however, the reverse—automatic conversion of administrative positions into academic faculty designations—is not provided for under the regulations.
A delegation of experts in medical education warned that the proposed re-designation, if implemented in a blanket manner without ensuring fulfilment of the prescribed eligibility criteria, would be inconsistent with the TEQ Regulations. Such an approach does not inherently account for essential requirements such as prior teaching experience in a recognized medical college, requisite duration of service at each academic level, or the mandated number of indexed research publications. “Additionally, faculty appointments are expected to be made through a defined selection process by competent authorities, which is not addressed within the scope of the proposed re-designation,” the experts said.
The delegation strictly warned that from a regulatory standpoint, there is a substantial risk that such re-designated positions may not be recognized as valid faculty by the National Medical Commission during inspections. This could lead to observations of faculty deficiency, adversely affecting accreditation status, recognition of undergraduate and postgraduate seats, and overall institutional standing. “Any discrepancy in faculty eligibility is typically viewed seriously during inspections and may result in denial or reduction of permitted intake, besides reputational implications for the institution,” the delegation said.
It is also notable, while recent regulatory developments have introduced certain flexibilities, including the possibility of appointing experienced specialists from government health services as faculty, such provisions are conditional. They require that the individuals concerned possess recognized postgraduate qualifications, meet experience thresholds, undergo prescribed training such as Medical Education Technology courses, and fulfil research and publication criteria. Importantly, such appointments are made on a case-to-case basis through due process and cannot be generalized as automatic entitlement based on administrative designation.
In view of the above, the proposal in its current form may not withstand regulatory scrutiny. However, the underlying objective of optimally utilizing the expertise of experienced administrative officers within the academic framework is both valid and achievable through a compliant mechanism.
“It is imperative for the competent authority that any policy decision in this regard be aligned with NMC regulations by incorporating a provision that administrative incumbents may be considered for academic appointments only if they independently fulfil all prescribed eligibility criteria and are selected through an appropriate process,” said the delegation of doctors who are experts in teaching.
They demanded that a suitable formulation may be adopted to the effect that Medical Superintendents, Deputy Medical Superintendents, and Assistant Medical Superintendents may be eligible for consideration for academic designation subject to fulfilment of the Teachers Eligibility Qualifications Regulations of the National Medical Commission, including required qualifications, teaching experience, research publications, and completion of requisite training, and upon selection by the competent authority as per established procedures.
“Such an approach would ensure regulatory compliance, safeguard the academic integrity of medical colleges, and prevent potential adverse observations during inspections, while still enabling integration of administrative experience into teaching and training domains. It would also provide a structured and legally sustainable pathway for eligible officers to contribute to medical education without compromising statutory requirements,” they said.
(Straight Talk Communications)
