B2 Annexures - Tata Institute of Fundamental …gsoffice/TIFR-naac/B2-annexures.pdfSilica Spheres...

B2 Annexures

B2-A: List of patents / patent applications (Q. 3.2.2)

B2-B: TIFR Guidelines for Academic Ethics (Q. 3.4.6)

B2-C: Guidelines for Knowledge-based revenue / Consultancy /

Patents / Examinerships / Lectures / Talks / Book writing (Q.

3.5.1)

B2-D: List of MoUs signed by TIFR (Q. 3.7.3)

B2-E: The Council of Management (Q. 6.2.2)

B2-F: The Academic Council and the Subject Boards (Q. 6.2.2)

B2-G: Court cases filed against and by TIFR (Q. 6.2.5)

B2-H: Income and expenditure statements of last 4 years (Q. 6.4.4)

Annexure B2-A

List of TIFR Patents / Patent Applications

From TIFR Main campus:

Patent name Patent holder Date of Filing Status Country

1

An apparatus for carrying out non-destructive measurement of electro-reflectance and surface photovoltage spectroscopies on a semiconductor sample in soft contact mode

S. Datta, Sandip Ghosh, B. M. Arora 14-09-00 Granted,

Expired India

2

A process for manufacture of half metallic ferromagnet with CrO2 or Composites of CrO2 chromium sesquioxide

Dr. Ashna Bajpai, Prof. Arun K Nigam, Dept. of Condensed Matter Physics

29-08-02 Granted India

3

A composition for creating an artificial bone marrow-like environment and use thereof

Prof. L. C. Padhy, Dr. V. P. Kale (NCCS) 2005 onwards Granted

India, Japan, China, New

Zealand, Singapore,

South Korea,

Mexico, Canada, Israel, Brazil

4

Chromium dioxide (CrO2) and composites of chromium dioxide and other oxides of Chromium such as CrO2/Cr2O3 and CrO2/Cr2O5 and process for manufacturing the same


28-02-05 Granted USA

5

Chromium dioxide (CrO2) and composites of chromium dioxide and other oxides of Chromium


28-02-05 Filed Europe

TIFR patents TIFR NAAC Self Study Report 2016 Annex-B2-A

Patent name Patent holder Date of Filing Status Country

such as CrO2/Cr2O3 and CrO2/Cr2O5 and process for manufacturing the same

6 A Novel assay for screening anti-psychotic drugs

Prof. M.M. Panickar, Prof. S. Bhattacharyya


7 Fluorescence correlation microscopy with real time alignment readout

Dr. Sudipta Maiti, S.K. Kaushalya, Kanchan Garaj, Jaiprakash Balaji


8 An optical source, its method of preparation and its application thereof

Dr. Sushil Majumdar 09-04-10 Filed India

9 Novel plasmodium protein as malarial vaccine and drug target

Dr Shobhona Sharma, Dr. Sudipta Das 17-06-11 Filed India

10 Biological laser plasma X-ray point source

M. Krishnamurthy, Krishanu Ray, G. Ravindra Kumar

07-06-12 Filed India

11

A decentralized information flow security model for multilevel security and privacy domains

Prof. R. K. Shyamsundar & Dr. N. V. Narendra Kumar

08-06-15 Filed USA

12

Synthesis of Fibrous Nano-Silica Spheres with controlled Particle Size, Fibre Density, and Various Textural Properties

Dr. Vivek Polshettiwar, Dr. Nisha Bayal, Mr. Baljeet Singh, Mr. Rustam Singh & Mr. Ayan Maity, Department of Chemical Sciences, TIFR

04-02-16 Filed India Provisional


From NCRA: Patent Name Patent Holder Date of

Filing Status Country

/Region

1 Preloaded parabolic dish antenna and the method for making it

Govind Swarup 29-06-07 Granted India

From NCBS: Patent Name Patent Holder Date of

Filing Status Country

/Region

1 Intracellular pH sensor using nucleic acid assemblies

Yamuna Krishnan and Satyajit Mayor 29-05-09 Filed USA

2

The use of inositol 1,4,5 triphosphate receptor mutants in Drosophila for screening small molecules

Gaiti Hassan and GayatriVenkiteswaran 30-11-09 Granted USA

3 DNA-based molecular switches and uses thereof

Yamuna Krishnan and Saikat Chakraborty 10-03-10 Granted USA

4

A microfluidic device for immobilizing and imaging of developmental processes and growth of transparent/translucent organisms

SudipMondal and Sandhya P Koushika 03-03-11 Filed India

5

A process for delivering encapsulated neutral bioimaging molecules, complex, and process thereof

Dhirajbhatia and Yamuna Krishnan 28-04-11 Filed USA,

Europe

6 DNA-based molecular switches and uses thereof

Yamuna Krishnan and Saikat Chakraborty 12-08-11 Granted USA

7 An engineered nucleic acid assembly, vector, cell, methods and kit thereof

Yamuna krishnan and Souvik Modi 20-09-11 Filed USA,

Europe

8 Method of determining effect of anti-obesity molecule

Gaiti Hassan and Manivannan Subramanian

30-05-12 Filed, Abondoned

PCT

9 A method to identify and isolate pluripotent stem cells using endogenous

Panicker, Odity Mukerjee, Thangaselvam

12-11-12 Filed USA,

Europe (P)


blue fluorescence

10

Method of multiplexing dna sensors, localizing dna sensor and obtaining fret pair

Yamuna krishnan and Souvik Modi + SunainaSurana

26-02-13 Filed PCT (P)

11 Nucleotide sequences, nucleic acid sensors and methods thereof

Yamuna Krishnan and Suruchi Sharma 04-09-13 Filed USA,

PCT (P)

12 Nucleic acid scaffold based fluorescent ratio-metric sensor for chloride

Yamuna Krishnan, Sonali Saha, Ved Prakash

15-04-14 Filed PCT

13

System and method for obtaining three components of force based on photoelasticity

MadhusudhanVenkadesan, Mahesh Bandi and ShreyasMandre

03-06-14 Filed PCT (P)

14 Wavelength stabilized active mode locked fibre laser

Anil Prabhakar and Satyajit Mayor 10-06-14 Filed

India,

PCT (P)

(P) indicates Provisional PCT: International patent Filed under Patent Cooperation Treaty (PCT)


Homi Bhabha Road, Mumbai 400 005,

India An autonomous institution of the Department of Atomic Energy, Government of India and a Deemed University

Annexure B2-B

Guidelines on Academic Ethics

1. Preamble

The Tata Institute of Fundamental Research (TIFR) expects all its members to follow the highest standards of academic ethics. The present document outlines these standards and how they are to be followed, in the form of guidelines.

While all of us are required to follow ethical norms originating from the values that inform the Constitution of India, the special nature of academic activities places special responsibilities upon us at TIFR. These take the form of moral obligations towards our fellow members, the Institute, the public at large, academicians all over the world, and our own academic disciplines. Academic members of TIFR pursue diverse activities including the conduct of research, publication of articles, training and mentoring, administration of science and interfacing with the public and press. In all these contexts, the best scientific atmosphere requires awareness, sensitivity and careful adherence to ethical norms.

This document prescribes various types of necessary and desirable academic practices, and also highlights several types of practice that are not acceptable. It sets down procedures to investigate alleged cases of ethical misconduct and remedial actions to be taken by the authorities whenever such misconduct may have occurred. This document is not exhaustive and could undergo revisions in the future.

This document has drawn upon the document “Scientific Values: Ethical Guidelines and Procedures” of the Indian Academy of Sciences, with their kind permission.

2. Conduct of Research

2.1. Responsibilities of a research investigator

Research at the Institute is conducted either individually, or within informal collaborations, or in organized groups conducting research on specific projects. In a wide variety of research projects, some combination of faculty members, postdoctoral researchers, laboratory staff, students and/or external collaborators may be involved. All individuals participating in a given project are responsible for their own actions and should make sure these are consistent with, and uphold, high ethical standards.

In experimental research projects there is usually a Principal Investigator (PI) or a set of co-PI’s who lead the project. The PI’s are also expected to play a leading role in ensuring ethical standards.

TIFR Code of Ethics TIFR NAAC Self Study Report 2016 Annexure B2-B

He or she should closely and regularly monitor the experimental procedures used and formulate policies for recording data and compiling results in the form of publications and reports. It is advisable to formulate norms in this regard which should be made known to all the participants in the research project. The PI should also ensure careful supervision and appropriate mentoring of young researchers including students and postdoctoral fellows. In the case of informal collaborations, more common in theoretical disciplines, there may not be a designated PI but all members involved are expected to play an appropriate role to ensure that ethical standards are upheld.

2.2 Responsibilities of a student

In additional to their ethical responsibilities as researchers, graduate students at TIFR are required to adhere to the highest ethical standards in their conduct during courses, assignments and examinations and in their behaviour towards other members of the research community.

2.3 Data management

In both independent and collaborative research, every effort must be made to ensure that data are collected and computations performed with complete honesty. False statements and/or deliberate distortions are unacceptable. Fabrication, falsification or improper manipulation of data are highly unethical and must not be resorted to for any reason. Investigators in any given field should familiarize themselves with the methods of handling and processing data that are considered acceptable/unacceptable in their field. The procedures for recording and storing data will also vary from subject to subject, but in each case they should be well formulated in advance and scrupulously followed. Researchers should be aware that it is not uncommon for the correctness of a research publication to be questioned, even after publication.

Particularly with experimental work, defending the publication requires properly recorded raw data to be produced and its absence or premature destruction could be treated as suspicious. A well maintained lab notebook provides not only a permanent record of results and protocols for future publications, but also serves as critical evidence for a claim of priority in the case of patent applications and as proof of adherence to appropriate ethical standards. Tampering with or manipulating records in a laboratory notebook is considered to be fraudulent activity. It is recommended that research related data, lab notebooks and material be stored in a secure manner so that if required the scientific validity of the data can be examined. Generating, recording and publishing false data are fraudulent practices that must be scrupulously avoided.

2.4 Ownership

Physical materials including lab notebooks, data sets etc arising out of research performed at TIFR, will remain the property of TIFR unless explicitly decided otherwise. The same holds for software and processes having commercial value.

2.5 Responsible use of funds

The management of research funds requires adherence to TIFR financial policies and regulations. This is applicable to both funds received from TIFR and from external granting agencies. Efforts should be made to ensure reasonable and efficient use of resources following transparent and fair processes.


2.6 Sharing of facilities

Equipment installed at TIFR is expected to be shared in a collegial spirit with colleagues who have the background to operate the equipment and require access for their own research, as long as such access does not impede the original purpose for which the equipment was purchased. Wherever time-sharing is appropriate, transparent procedures for this should be put in place.

2.7 Experiments involving human beings or animals

All experiments that involve use of animal and human research subjects require ethical permission and approval. Experiments involving animals come under the purview of the TIFR Institutional Animal Ethics Committee (IAEC) which functions based on the guidelines of CPSEA (Committee for the Protection, Case and Supervision of Experimental Animals). Experiments involving human subjects come under the purview of the TIFR Institutional Human Ethics Committee (IHEC) which functions based on the guideline of ICMR (Indian Council of Medical Research).

2.8 Safety and environment

It is the moral responsibility of a scientist that his/her research activity should not endanger others by compromising their safety or health or by creating environmental hazards. TIFR expects all its members to incorporate safety and environmental concerns into research practices. In this regard it is important that applicable environmental guidelines, regulations and laws are followed, and that appropriate licenses/permits and clearances are obtained for the handling, storage or disposal of hazardous material. In particular within experimental laboratories the PI’s should take responsibility for ensuring that the work area is safe, and that research practices of the group do not endanger the research team, visitors or the public. In this regard the PI’s are expected to encourage team members to undergo appropriate training to maintain safety and environmental standards.

3. Training

3.1 Student recruitment, assessment and allotment

Recruitment of students to TIFR should involve a fair and transparent procedure. While assessing merit during a selection can involve some subjective features, particularly during interviews, care must be taken to ensure that extraneous considerations – namely, any attribute of the student that has no bearing on academic ability or potential – are rigorously avoided. Assessment of the performance of students, made through examinations and by course or thesis guides, must also be carried out with maximum objectivity. The assessment procedure for a course or project should be made clear to the student from the beginning. The same holds when students are allocated to research programmes, for which purpose a fair and transparent procedure should be put in place and made known to all candidates.

3.2 Research supervision

It is self-evident that during the course of their research activity, students tend to absorb and internalize the ethical atmosphere within their group. For this reason among others, research supervisors should display the highest ethical standards when dealing with students. Conflicts


between students and others in their group, or between students and guides, are not uncommon in academia. Supervisors should be aware of the potential for this type of problem. Potentially troublesome issues should be identified and dealt with as soon as possible, ideally before they graduate into full-blown conflicts. Claims and counter-claims about relative contributions are a particularly problematic area which supervisors need to handle with manifest fairness and clarity.

It is recommended that graduate students meet regularly with their doctoral thesis committee, whose role is to monitor the progress of the student’s thesis work, to ensure the student and thesis advisor work efficiently to meet graduate school related deadlines, and to mediate resolution of disputes should they arise.

3.3 Ethics in teaching

TIFR members involved in teaching and training of graduate students should treat the intellectual development of students as their highest priority. They should strive to ensure the highest quality in their course content, competence in teaching methodology and fairness in assessment of assignments and examinations. They are also expected to maintain confidentiality of student records and communications, and maintain dignity in the classroom environment.

3.4 Ethical training to students

Students at TIFR should receive direct ethical training, preferably on a regular basis. A mandatory ethics module should be provided at the time of joining as part of the orientation. Additionally course-specific and laboratory-specific ethical training should be imparted at the appropriate times.

4. Publications

4.1 Authorship

The authorship of scientific publications is a very important issue since it is the way in which scientists receive credit for their contributions. All listed authors of a publication should have contributed significantly to it. It is inappropriate to offer “guest authorship” to anyone who has not made any significant contribution. Likewise, it is wrong to exclude from authorship anyone who deserves to be an author. It is unethical to include anyone as an author of a paper without their clear consent. The order of authorship can also be important.

It is not possible in this document to list precisely what constitutes a significant contribution to a publication, or what is an appropriate authorship order. This is because community standards vary widely from subject to subject. Researchers should familiarize themselves with the standards in their field and, importantly, the criteria laid down by the journal to which their work is submitted. Deliberate failure to follow these criteria would be treated as ethical misconduct, not only towards the journal but also towards TIFR.

4.2 Plagiarism

The Oxford Dictionary defines plagiarism as “the practice of taking someone else‘s work or ideas and passing them off as one’s own”. In the context of scientific research, it can involve


unattributed lifting of textual material or scientific ideas or actual research results. The most extreme example would be a deliberate attempt to pass off someone else’s entire research project as one’s own. However, it can also involve (deliberate or unintentional) incorporation of some ideas or results of other researchers, without proper attribution, within one’s own research publication. Though the degree of severity can vary, plagiarism always amounts to ethical misconduct and requires redressal.

The use of someone else’s work in one’s own is not by itself unethical. A limited amount of textual material in someone else’s paper can be copied if it is clearly marked as a quote (typically by enclosing it within quotation marks) and the source is explicitly cited where the quote starts or ends. Alternatively, text may be paraphrased with a general indication of where the concepts originated. Occasional re-ordering or substituting of words is not sufficient to count as paraphrasing: the recommended procedure is to read and understand the source material, then put it away and express the idea in one’s own words. Besides textual material, the incorporation of ideas, figures, graphs etc from other sources in a manner that conveys a false impression that they are original amounts to plagiarism.

Taking one’s own published results and reproducing them in another work as if they were new is “self-plagiarism”. “Duplicate publication” – submitting the same research results to two or more journals and treating them as separate publications – is also a form of self-plagiarism and must be avoided.

Plagiarism is an issue not only for scientific publications but also internal reports, textbooks, monographs and grant proposals. The considerations above apply equally in all these cases.

4.3 Thesis writing

A thesis typically involves collecting a large amount of material, both previously established and original. The manner of presentation must be such as to make clear what has been taken from other sources with appropriate acknowledgement and permissions if required, and what is the original content. For a student, thesis writing is often the first major occasion that requires taking personal responsibility to handle ethical issues. Guidance must be imparted to make sure that data is presented appropriately and plagiarism, even inadvertent, is avoided.

4.4 Responsibility of referees

Scientists who are asked to review a manuscript or a research proposal have a responsibility to ensure they do not misuse their advance access to the information and ideas in these documents. The use of such advance access to publish a competing work, or carry out research that preempts the proposed project, would be highly unethical.

5. Confidentiality

Several aspects of academia require the maintaining of strict confidentiality. The proceedings and Minutes of certain meetings, as also assessments for hiring and promotion, are not to be discussed publicly. It is particularly important for the health of the Institute that candidates about whom


positive or negative comments are made in meetings by specific members should not learn about these comments. Such leaks could compromise the ability of Institute members to give honest assessments. They can create resentment, or conversely an inappropriate sense of obligation, on the part of a candidate. Unauthorised email circulation of confidential Minutes or other privileged communications, within or outside the Institute, amounts to a serious breach of academic ethics. For this purpose it is best to consider all official emails and communications to be confidential unless it has been expressly clarified to the contrary.

6. Science management

6.1 Evaluations: hiring, promotion, awards

In a research institute, assessment of candidates for hiring, promotion and awards is a regular activity. While this necessarily involves some degree of subjective judgement, it is essential that an assessor take great care to eliminate personal biases and extraneous considerations and proceed in a manner that is visibly fair and balanced. The general criteria for hiring, assessment and awards should, as far as possible, be laid down in advance. It is inappropriate to introduce new criteria, not previously agreed upon, during an assessment process purely for the purpose of favouring or disqualifying specific candidates. When referee evaluations are used, they should be sought in writing.

6.2 Technology and materials transfer

Research conducted at TIFR is based on the principle of the free dissemination of scientific knowledge, and this also applies to research at TIFR funded by industry. TIFR subscribes to the principle that inventions and discoveries emerging from publicly funded research should be made available for public benefit through appropriate technology transfer. Whenever inventions are patented or technology emerging from TIFR research is licensed for commercial use, care must be taken that the principle of free dissemination of scientific knowledge remains paramount. Patentable inventions based on work done at TIFR are to be assigned to TIFR.

When conducting research activities supported by external granting agencies or jointly with other research institutions, TIFR members must consider entering into clear agreements (formal or informal but explicit) which cover the nature of the collaboration, materials and technology transfer (whenever relevant), authorship of resulting publications and ownership of patentable inventions. These agreements must be consistent with the principles enunciated above.

Memorandums of Understanding (MOU's) are essential for industry-funded research. They should clearly state the manner of sharing of proprietary data, time lines to avoid delay of publications and procedures to be followed for patentable data. Potentially patentable inventions that arise from industry-funded research carried out at TIFR are to be subject to stipulations of the MOU between the industry and TIFR, set in place prior to the commencement of the research.

6.3 Bias and discrimination

The TIFR academic community is enriched by the presence of people of different ethnicities,


genders, ages, affiliations, backgrounds and sexual orientations. It is incumbent on the members to so conduct their academic affairs that there is no direct or indirect bias or discrimination against any individual based on the above categories.

TIFR aims for the full and equal participation of women in all academic activities. It is everyone's responsibility to foster a gender-neutral and supportive environment to achieve this goal.

6.4 Bullying and harassment

In academia it is essential to promote an atmosphere of free and frank debate and exchange of ideas. In this context, any form of bullying or harassment by individuals or pressure groups is not acceptable.

6.5 Interaction with public and media

Statements made to the media should be as objective, fair and balanced as possible. The same holds for scientific information conveyed to the public. Scientists are expected not to use the media to promote their own personal image or create a false or exaggerated impression of their achievements.

7. Conflict of interest

Several types of situations can arise in academia where a person experiences a conflict of interest. Reviewers of manuscripts may find that the contents of the manuscript have a potential impact on their own research or financial interests. Assessors for a hiring/promotion/award may be personally related to a candidate. Researchers who are also shareholders of a company may find themselves in a situation where their research could impact the company’s financial situation.

In all such cases it is essential for researchers to promptly disclose foreseeable conflicts of interest. It is not sufficient for the researcher to consciously decide to handle the matter objectively. The decision on whether the conflict of interest requires definite action (such as the researcher withdrawing from a committee) should be taken by other responsible colleagues. Foreseeable research conflicts should be reported to the Director TIFR and potential conflicts while reviewing manuscripts should be reported to the journal editor. In case an assessor has a personal relation to a candidate in an interview, this fact should be communicated to the committee Chair (or if the assessor in question is the Committee chair, then to the appointing authority of that Committee).

8. Reporting of misconduct

Suspected ethical misconduct at TIFR must be reported to the Director. There will be no reprisal for complaints made in all sincerity and good faith, even if they later turn out to be unfounded. However, complaints that turn out upon investigation to have been falsely made with deliberate intent to malign the accused will be treated as a serious form of ethical misconduct.

Complaints can be made by anyone, not necessarily an Institute member. They must be signed and


carry the full name and address of the complainant. Some relevant documentation must be supplied along with the complaint in order for the Director to be able to decide whether there is a prima facie case. The complainant should not give wide publicity to the complaint at this stage. Such publicity, if it occurs, can be treated as ethical misconduct even if the complaint is found to have merit and continues to be investigated.

9. Mechanism to address complaints

The Director will appoint a standing Committee on Academic Ethics for a pre-determined duration whose task is to investigate ethical complaints and also impart ethical training from time to time. The Director may also consult a broad-based Advisory Committee on ethical issues that involves Deans, Centre Directors and other faculty members.

9.1 Course of action

Upon receiving an ethics complaint, the Director TIFR should decide whether there is prima facie merit in the allegations. Finding such merit does not imply that the complaint has been upheld but only that it has not been found obviously invalid or frivolous. To decide this, the Director may consult the Ethics Committee.

At this stage, if appropriate the Director may, in consultation with the Ethics Committee, explore the possibility of an amicable solution through mediation. If this is successful the complainant will modify or withdraw the complaint in writing. However, the complainant should not be coerced to accept mediation.

If the Director is satisfied that the complaint merits investigation it should be passed on in full, including supporting documents, to the Ethics Committee. Simultaneously the Director should communicate it to the subjects of the complaint, informing them that an investigation will take place with which they are required to cooperate fully. Their response to the complaint should be invited and passed on to the Ethics Committee. The Director should also inform the complainant that the complaint has been referred to a Committee for investigation.

During the investigation period, both the complainant and the subjects of the complaint may submit information or documents to the Director, who shall forward these (if relevant) to the Ethics Committee. During this period they should not communicate with the Committee except when invited to do so, and should also minimise their communications with the Director on this matter.

The Ethics Committee should investigate the complaint carefully and with due discretion. During this period it should try to hold a face-to-face meeting with both the complainant and the subjects of the complaint if possible. At the end of its investigations it will submit a written report to the Director TIFR indicating the extent to which merit has, or has not, been found in the complaint, and suggesting remedial action if any is required. The Committee must not publicise the report at this stage.

On receiving the report, the Director should communicate it in full both to the complainant and to the subjects of the complaint and invite their response. Thereafter the Director may decide to accept


the report in full and implement it, or accept it partially, or reject it totally. This decision should be communicated to the Ethics Committee. The final verdict on the case, including any redressal required, will take the form of a written statement by the Director communicated to the complainant, the subjects of the complaint and the Ethics Committee. The Ethics Committee report may be attached to this statement in full or part, if relevant.

9.2 Time frame

The investigation of an ethics complaint cannot easily be assigned a time-frame. However for relatively simple cases it is desirable that the first report be submitted within 3-4 months. More complex cases, particularly those requiring detailed investigation of scientific issues, can take as long as six months to a year or even more.

9.3 Interference with the investigation

Any attempt to interfere with the functioning of the Ethics Committee in any manner, or refusal to cooperate with the investigation, constitutes an ethical violation by itself. This should be reported by the Committee to the Director for appropriate action.

9.4 Availability of results of ethics investigations to TIFR members

Members of TIFR are entitled to request the Director for access to the final report of the Ethics Committee, and the Director’s written statement to the concerned parties, upon completion of the investigation.

June 4, 2012.


Annexure B2-C

TIFR IPR Guidelines TIFR NAAC Self Study Report 2016 Annex B2-C




Annexure B2-D

MoUs / Agreements with other institutions

Institutions with MoUs / Agreements with the TIFR Main campus:

1. Spectrum Research Laboratory, LLC 2. Golden Vally Education Trust, Karnataka (Lease Agreement) 3. Uttar Pradesh State Observatory, Nanital 4. Sarojini Damodaran Charitable Trust, Bangalore 5. Nuclear Science Centre, Delhi 6. Infosys, Bangalore 7. TEMASEK Life Sciences Lab., Singapore 8. IBM Global Services Pvt. Ltd., Bangalore 9. BARC (Bio Gas Plant), Mumbai 10. Purdue University , USA 11. RRI (& NCRA), Bangalore 12. Hewlett Packard (HP), Bangalore 13. Manipal Univesrity, Karnataka 14. ERNET & DST (DIT, India) 15. Trinity College, Ireland 16. Indian Space Research Organization (ISRO), Bangalore 17. Homi Bhabha National Institute (HBNI), Mumbai 18. Hahn-Meitner Institute, Berlin, Germany 19. European Defence and Space Company, France 20. University of Mysore 21. University of Southampton, UK 22. University of Cambridge, UK 23. BARC & GANIL accelerator, France 24. University of Milano-Bicocca, Italy 25. PFIZER Inc., USA 26. CERN & RD-51 Collaboration, Geneva 27. Nagoya University, Japan 28. European Commission (Marie Curie actions - fellowships) 29. Carl Zesis Microimaging, Germany 30. Centre de recherches mathematiques de I'Universite de Montreal (CRM) 31. University of Sheffield, UK 32. Indian Institute of Technology (IIT), Kanpur 33. National Centre for Cell Science (NCCS), Pune 34. Indian Institute of Technology (IIT), Bombay

MoUs TIFR NAAC Self Study Report Annex-B2-D

35. Birla Institute of Technology and Science (BITS), PILANI 36. University Grants Commission (UGC) and Department of Atomic Energy (DAE) 37. BARC-TIFR-INFN (National Institute for Nuclear Physics, Italy) 38. University of Pisa, Italy 39. United Nations University (UNU/IIST), Macau 40. Japan Areospace Exploration Agency (JAXA), Japan 41. European Commission (Mariecurie actions - fellowships) 42. Bologna University (Alma Matter Studiorum), Italy 43. University of Edinburgh, UK 44. MONAMI (EU Consortium) 45. National Research Foundation, South Africa 46. University of Tsukuba, Japan 47. Foundation for Science and Technology (FCT) 48. Max-Planck Institute for Physics (MPP), Germany 49. Weizmann Institute of Science, Israel 50. The University of Queensland, Australia 51. University of Toronto, Canada 52. Osaka University, Japan 53. Dayalbagh Educational Institute, Agra 54. European Commission (The MATHematics European Infrastructure) 55. Indian Institute of Science Education and Research (IISER), Pune 56. University of North Texas, USA 57. Defence Research & Development Organisation (DRDO), Delhi, India 58. BCAM - Basque Center for Applied Mathematics 59. New York University, USA 60. Advanced Centre for Treatment, Research and Education in Cancer (ACTREC), Navi

Mumbai 61. Deccan College, Pune 62. Hebrew University of Jerusalem, Israel 63. Monash University, Melbourne, Australia 64. Inter-University Centre for Astronomy and Astrophysics (IUCAA), Pune 65. Argonne National Laboratory, USA 66. Carleton University, Canada 67. GLORIAD-NKN 68. Montreal University, Canada 69. Neutrino Collaboration 70. TWAS-UNESCO 71. Society for Applied Microwave Electronics Engineering and Research (SAMEER),

Mumbai 72. Holmark Optomechatronic Pvt. Ltd., Kochi 73. National Institute for Science, Education and Research (NISER), Bhubaneswar


74. Indian Association for Cultivation of Sciences (IACS), Kolkata 75. Vishwakarma Institute of Information Technology (VIIT), Pune 76. Rutgers, The State University of New Jersey, USA 77. British Council (UKIERI) 78. Indian Statistical Institute (ISI) 79. WURZBURG University, Germany 80. J.C. Bose Institute, Kolkata 81. Google India Pvt. Ltd 82. M/S. DSS IMAGETECH PVT. LTD 83. Tata Consultancy Services (TCS) Ltd. 84. Curadev Pharma Pvt. Ltd. 85. The Board of Trustees of the University of Illinos, USA 86. The Institute of Theoretical and Applied Physics, Turkey 87. John Templeton Foundation 88. Centre for Development of Advanced Computing (CDAC), Pune 89. Netherlands Organization for Scientific Research (NOW) 90. Korea Institute for Advanced Study (KIAS), Seoul 91. Unilever Industries Pvt. Ltd 92. Laboratoire International Associe SIGID, France 93. Tsinghua University, China 94. Indian Institute of Technology (IIT), Ropar 95. The Science and Technology Facilities Council, UK

Institutions with MoUs / Agreements with NCRA:

1. Inter-University Centre for Astronomy and Astrophysics (IUCAA), Pune 2. Indian Institute for Science, Education, and Research (IISER), Pune 3. Centre for Development of Advanced Computing (CDAC), Pune 4. Indian Space Research Organization (ISRO), Bengaluru 5. Bhabha Atomic Research Centre (BARC), Mumbai 6. Pune University, Pune

Institutions with MoUs / Agreements with NCBS:

1. Brandeis University, USA 2. Andaman-Nicobar Islands Environmental Team (ANET) 3. Madras Crocodile Bank Trust (MCBT) 4. Institut Curie, CNRS, Europe 5. University of Copenhagen, Denmark 6. The University of Lausanne, Faculty of Biology and Medicine (UNIL-FBM), Switzerland


7. Wipro, Bangalore 8. University of Agricultural Sciences (UAS), Bangalore 9. RIKEN, Japan 10. Bhagwan Mahaveer Jain Hospital, Bangalore 11. St. John's Medical College, Bangalore and Beckman Coulter India P Ltd. (BCIPL),

Mumbai 12. Loyola University, Chicago 13. University of Dundee, Scotland 14. National Institute of Mental Health and Neurosciences (NIMHANS), Bangalore 15. Goethe-Institut/Max Mueller Bhavan 16. University of British Columbia, Canada 17. Bioinformatics Institute of India (BII) 18. L'oreal 19. University of Wurzburg, Germany 20. University of Zurich, Switzerland 21. Wipro, Bangalore and NCF 22. The Regents of the University of California 23. Max-Planck-Gesellschaft, Germany 24. MMV Medicines for Malaria Venture and FNDR 25. Institute of Molecular Cell Biology, Biomedical Sciences Institutes, Singapore 26. University of Edinburgh, UK 27. Institute for Integrated Cell-Material Sciences (ICEMS), Kyoto, Japan 28. Narayana Hrudayalaya Institute of Medical Sciences, Bangalore 29. European Molecular Biology Laboratory (EMBL) 30. Department of Biotechnology (DBT) 31. TEMASEK LIFE SCIENCES LABORATORY, SINGAPORE 32. Institute for Stem-cell biology and Regenarative Medicine (inSTem), Bengalore 33. NCBS, InStem, University of Milan, IFOM-Milan, IEO-Milan. Italy 34. University of Connecticut, USA 35. Parivarthan Counselling, Training & Research Centre, Bangalore 36. Bombay Natural History Society (BNHS), Maharashtra 37. Salim Ali Centre for Ornithology and Natural History, Coimbatore 38. Centre for Wildlife Studies (CWS), Bangalore 39. Nature Conservation Foundation (NCF), Mysore 40. Julius-Maximilians-University of Wurzberg, Germany 41. Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique (CNRS) & Air Marseille Universite

(AMU), France. 42. Manipal University, Manipal 43. National Institute of Virology (NIV), Pune 44. Becton Dickinson India Pvt. Ltd., Gurgaon. 45. University of Zurich, Switzerland


46. Rajiv Gandhi University of Health Sciences, Bangalore 47. Kadamane Estates Company, Parry House, 43, Moore Street, Chennai 1 48. Dakshin Foundation, Bangalore 49. Infosys Foundation, Bangalore 50. Instem , CCamp & IIT, Madras 51. Joint Graduate Entrance Examination for BIology and Interdisciplinary LIfe Scineces

(JGEEBILS): CDFD, Hyderabad 52. Centre for Cellular and Molecular Biology (CCMB), Hyderabad 53. National Brain Research Centre (NBRC), Manesar 54. National Centre for Cell Science (NCCS), Pune 55. Indian Institute for Science, Education, and Research (IISER), Pune 56. Indian Institute for Science, Education, and Research (IISER), Mohali 57. Indian Institute for Science, Education, and Research (IISER), Bhopal 58. Indian Institute for Science, Education, and Research (IISER), Kolkata 59. Indian Institute for Science, Education, and Research (IISER), Thiruvanantapuram 60. National Institute of immunology (NII), New Delhi 61. Regional Centre for Biotechnology (RCB), Faridabad 62. Advanced Centre for Treatment, Research and Education in Cancer (ACTREC), Navi

Mumbai 63. National Institute for Science, Education, and Research (NISER), Bhubaneswar 64. Saha Institute for Nuclear Physics (SINP), Kolkata

Institutions with MoUs / Agreements with ICTS:

1. Asia Pacific Center for Theoretical Physics (APCTP), South Korea 2. Brandeis University, US 3. EADS Corporate Foundation, Paris 4. University of Illinois at Urbana–Champaign [UIUC (Illinois)], US 5. International Centre for Theoretical Physics (ICTP), Italy 6. Infosys Foundation, India 7. Indian Institute of Science, Bangalore, India 8. Max Planck Institute, Germany 9. Indigo Consortium, India


Annexure B2-E

TIFR Council of Management

The Council of Management of TIFR:

• Mr. Ratan Tata (Chairman) • Prof. Sandip P. Trivedi, Director, TIFR • Prof. C. N. R. Rao, Bharat Ratna, FRS, FNA, FASc, FNASc, JNCASR, Bengaluru • Dr. Sekhar Basu, Chairman, Atomic Energy Commission and Secretary, Department

of Atomic Energy, Govt. of India • Dr. K. Kasturirangan, FNA, FASc, ex-Chairman, ISRO, (former) Rajya Sabha member,

(former) Planning Commission member, Govt. of India • Mr. R. K. Krishna Kumar, Trustee, Tata Trusts • Dr. Shekhar Mande, Director, National Centre for Cell Science, Savitribai Phule Pune

University • Mr. Vinod Kumar Thakral, Special Secretary and Financial Advisor, Department of

Fertilizers, Ministry of Chemicals and Fertilizers

Council of Management TIFR NAAC Self Study Report 2016 Annex B2-E

Annexure B2-F

Academic Council and Subject Boards

The Academic Council:

• Prof. Sandip Trivedi (Director, TIFR) – Chairperson • Prof. Amol Dighe (Dean, GS - TIFR) • Prof. J. Ramadas (Centre Director,HBSCE-TIFR) • Prof. Satyajit Mayor (Centre Director, NCBS-TIFR) • Prof. S. K. Ghosh (Centre Director, NCRA-TIFR) • Prof. Sriram Ramaswamy (Centre Director, TCIS-TIFR) • Prof. Rajesh Gopakumar (Centre Director, ICTS) • Prof. H. M. Antia (Dean, NSF - TIFR) • Prof. A. J. Parameswaran (Dean, MF - TIFR) • Prof. P. K. Pandya (Dean, TCSF) • Prof. K. Subramaniam (Dean, HBCSE - TIFR) • Prof. J. Chengalur (Dean, NCRA-TIFR) • Prof. Surajit Sengupta (Dean, TCIS-TIFR) • Prof. Abhishek Dhar (Dean, ICTS, TIFR) • Prof. Veerappa Gowda (Dean, CAM, TIFR) • Prof. Upinder Bhalla (Dean, NCBS, Convener, SB Biology TIFR) • Prof. Ranjan Das (Convener, SB Chemistry - TIFR) • Prof. Nitin Nitsure (Convener, SB Mathematics - TIFR) • Prof. Sreerup Raychaudhuri (Convener, SB Physics - TIFR) • Prof. Prahladh Harsha (Convener, SB Computer & Systems Sc. - TIFR) • Prof. D. J. Ojha (Chair, DAA - TIFR) • Prof. Shobona Sharma (Chair, DBS - TIFR) • Prof. Pushan Ayyub (Chair, DCMPMS - TIFR) • Prof. S. Mazumdar (Chair, DCS - TIFR) • Prof. Sudeshna Banerjee (Chair, DHEP - TIFR) • Prof. S.N. Mishra (Chair, DNAP - TIFR) • Prof. R. V. Gavai (Chair, DTP - TIFR) • Wg. Cdr George Antony (Retd). (Registrar, TIFR) • Prof. Rajendra Bhatia (Indian Statistical Institute, Delhi) • Prof. D. Balasubramanian (Director, LV Prasad Eye Institute) • Prof. Vikram M. Gadre (Indian Institute of Technology Bombay) • Prof. R. Ramaswamy (Jawaharlal Nehru University, Delhi)

Subject Boards TIFR NAAC Self Study Report 2016 Annex B2-F

The Subject Boards:

BIOLOGY:

• Prof. Upinder S. Bhalla (Convener) • Prof. Uma Ramakrishnan (NCBS representative) • Prof. Mukund Thattai (NCBS, Head Academics) • Prof. Jayashree Ratnam (NCBS-WCS Coordinator) • Prof. Shobhona Sharma (DBS Coordinator) • Prof. Shubha Tole (DBS Ph.D./I-Ph.D. student matters) • Prof. Sandhya Koushika (DBS M.Sc. student matters) • Prof. Aprotim Mazumdar (TIFR-H Coordinator) • Dr. Sreelaja Nair (DBS Course Coordinator)

CHEMISTRY:

• Prof. Ranjan Das (Convener, Course Coordinator) • Prof. A. Sri Rama Koti (Admissions Coordinator) • Prof. Deepa Khushalani • Prof. P.K. Madhu • Prof. Bhaswati Mookerjea (Representative of Subject Board for Physics) • Dr. Ankona Datta • Dr. Anukul Jena (TCIS representative) • Dr. Ravi Venkataramani

COMPUTER & SYSTEMS SCIENCES:

• Prof. Prahladh Harsha (Convener) • Prof. P.K. Pandya • Prof. Sandeep K. Juneja • Dr. Arkadev Chattopadhyay • Dr. Vinod M. Prabhakaran • Dr. Rahul Vaze


MATHEMATICS

• Prof. Nitin Nitsure (Convener) • Dr. Siddhartha Bhattacharya • Dr. Anish Ghosh • Dr. Sandeep Verma • Dr. Amitava Bhattacharya • Prof. G.D. Veerappa Gowda (Dean, TIFR-CAM) • Prof. K. Sandeep (TIFR-CAM representative) • Dr. Amit Apte (ICTS representative)

PHYSICS:

• Prof. Sreerup Raychaudhuri (Convener) • Prof. D.K. Ojha (Chairperson, DAA) • Prof. Pushan Ayyub (Chairperson, DCMP & MS) • Prof. B.S. Acharya (Chairperson, DHEP) • Prof. S.N. Mishra (Chairperson, DNAP) • Prof. R.V. Gavai (Chairperson, DTP) • Prof. J.N. Chengalur (Dean, NCRA Faculty) • Prof. Gobinda Majumder • Prof. Bhaswati Mookerjea • Dr. Vaibhav Prabhudesai • Dr. R. Vijayaraghavan • Prof. Saumen Datta (Course Coordinator) • Prof. Monoranjan Guchait (Admissions Coordinator) • Dr. Suvrat Raju (ICTS representative) • Prof. Rama Govindarajan (TCIS representative) • Prof. Deepa Khushalani (Representative of Subject Board for Chemistry)

SCIENCE EDUCATION :

• Prof. Jayashree Ramadas (Convener) • Prof. Sugra I. Chunawala • Prof. G. Nagarjuna • Prof. Savita Ladage • Prof. Anwesh Mazumdar • Prof. K. Subramaniam (Dean, HBCSE)



Annexure B2-G

Court cases filed against and by TIFR

Case Name & No.

Case no.

Court Brief of Case Status

1. Y.B. Ayyappa v. TIFRNational Balloon Facility, Hyderabad & Ors.

OA No.892 of 2012

Central Administrative Tribunal, Hyderabad Bench

A case was filed by the Respondent employee challenging the termination letter issued by TIFR National Balloon Facility, Hyderabad before the Central Administrative Tribunal (CAT).

The Tribunal passed an award dated 31st January, 2013 in favour of the Respondent employee.

2. TIFR, Balloon Facility, Hyderabad & Anr.

v.

Y. B. Ayyappa & Anr.

W.P. No 4985 of 2013

Andhra Pradesh High Court, Telangana

An appeal has been filed before the High Court against the order of the CAT dated 31st January 2013.

Interim relief has been granted in favour of TIFR by an order dated 20th February, 2013.

The matter is pending for hearing.

3. R.S. Lokhande v. Director, TIFR & Ors.

IDA No. 498 of 2000

3rd Labour Court, Pune

A case has been filed by the Applicant employee challenging his termination (due to misconduct) during his probation. The employee had admitted his misconduct.

By an award dated 26th April, 2011, the 3rd Labour Court of Pune has held NCRA, Pune to be an Industry under the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947. The proceedings before the Labour Court have been stayed as per the Order of the High Court.

4. Director, TIFR

v.

R.S. Lokhande

WP No. 9193 of 2011

Bombay High Court, (Appellate Side) Maharashtra

(In the 3rd

Writ Petition has been filed before the High Court challenging the award dated 26th April, 2011 of the 3rd Labour Court of Pune holding

The Hon’ble High Court has passed a stay order dated 13th January, 2012 in favour of TIFR and

Court Cases TIFR NAAC Self Study Report 2016 Annex B2-G

Case Name & No.

Case no.


Labour Court, Pune, the matter is pending because the High Court has passed the stay for the award.)

NCRA, Pune to be an Industry under the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947.

others.

5. S.R. Shetty v. TIFR & Ors.

Suit No.1224/ 1844 of 2006

Small Causes Court, Mumbai

The Plaintiff had filed the suit seeking possession of his flat which has been occupied by TIFR since 1948 on rental basis.

An Order dated 1st December, 2012 was passed by the Hon’ble Small Causes Court Judge, whereby the suit was partly decreed with proportionate costs and TIFR was ordered to deliver the possession of the suit premises within a period of three months.

6. TIFR v. S.R. Shetty & Ors.

Appeal No. 22 of 2013

Small Causes Appellate Court, Mumbai

The appeal has been filed against the Order dated 1st December, 2012 of the Hon’ble Small Causes Court Judge in Suit no.1224/1844 of 2006.

The appeal is admitted.

A stay order dated 8th March 2013 has been passed and has been continued in favour of TIFR.

7. Shri K. Maharaja

v.

The Director, TIFR & Ors.

WP No. 8784/2013

Chennai High Court, Tamil Nadu

The writ petition has been filed by the Petitioner employee challenging the termination order issued by NCRA (RAC, Ooty), TIFR during the probation period.

The case is pending for admission

8. Mr. Rajamohan Sutrave

Civil WP No. 2881/201

Bombay High Court, Maharashtra

The Writ Petition has been filed seeking relief regarding promotion and

The case is pending for further hearing


Case Name & No.

Case no.


v.

Council of Mgt. TIFR, Mumbai & Ors.

3 other grievances.

9. Mr.V.Packiraraj

v.

NCRA TIFR, Pune & Ors.

Original Application No. 310/1570/2015

Central Administrative Tribunal, Chennai

The case has been filed to stay all further proceedings pursuant to the Memo No. NCRA/Estt./VPA034/2K15/639E dated 20 October 2015. The case challenges the domestic enquiry. The staff member is charged with misconduct on 5 counts. A memo has been issued to hold enquiry against the charges. The charged staff member has approached the CAT, which has stayed the enquiry.

An affidavit in reply dated 5th February, 2016 has been filed by NCRA. The case is pending for hearing.

10. Dilip Gupte v. TIFR & Ors.

Suit no. 107483 of 2005(Suit transferred from HC- HC Suit no. 1637 of 2005)

City Civil Court, Mumbai

The case challenges the termination letter and enquiry report issued by TIFR, Mumbai.

The matter is pending for further hearing

11. Vinayak Nagar (HAL) Mutually Aided Co-operative Society v. State of A.P. & Ors.

Original Suit No. 789 of 2011

District Judge, Rangareddy district, Telangana

Suit for permanent injunction against Defendants restraining them from interfering with the possession and enjoyment of 10 gunthas of land that the Plaintiff Co-operative Society and its members claim to be owners of. The land is

Suit is pending.

An application for interim relief of temporary injunction against the Defendants was rejected by the Court by an order


Case Name & No.

Case no.


claimed to be a part of the total 209 acres of land granted to TIFR at Hyderabad.

dated 20th April, 2012.

12. TIFR as Applicant in the case of V.Ananthamma v. Principal Secretary, Revenue Dept. Hyd. & Ors.

Impleadment Petition no. 7391 of 2013 in W.P. no. 7106 of 2012


The Writ Petition has been filed by the Petitioners on the basis of a claim made by the Petitioners that the land was allotted to the Petitioners under a Family Planning Scheme 1960.

TIFR will be an affected party if any order is passed in this Writ Petition as the said land has been allotted to TIFR by the Government by a G.O.

Impleadment Petition to make TIFR a party to the Writ Petition is pending

13. TIFR as Applicant in the case of B.Srinivas & Ors. v. Secretary, Revenue Dept. & Ors.

Impleadment Petition no. 48875 of 2012 in W.P. no. 28009 of 2012


Writ petition has been filed on the basis of a claim made by the petitioners that they purchased the plots from persons who were assigned the said plots under certain schemes of the Government. It however appears that the Government had resumed possession of the land.

TIFR will be an affected party if any order is passed in this Writ Petition as the said land has been allotted to TIFR by the Government by a G.O.

Impleadment Petition to make TIFR a party to the Writ Petition is pending


Case Name & No.

Case no.


14. Seema Nanda v. Union of India & Ors.

Writ Petition no.26964-26967 of 2014

Karnataka High Court

The Petitioner’s appointment was for an initial period of five years. She was not granted a continuing appointment thereafter. The Petitioner has inter alia prayed for grant of permanent position.

Petition is pending.

An application for interim order to continue the Petitioner was rejected vide order dated 30th January, 2015.

15. TIFR Sabhasad Sanghatana v. Union of India & Ors.

Writ Petition no. 6239 of 2015

Bombay High Court

The Petitioners have filed the petition seeking parity in pay scales with DAE employees of same cadre.

The case is pending before the High Court.

16. Rohit Pathak & Ors. v. Union of India & Ors.

Writ Petition no. 913 of 2016

Madhya Pradesh High Court

The Petitioners have filed the case challenging the different dates of declaration of results of the Regional rounds of the Mathematical Olympiad.

The matter is pending before the High Court.

17. Shrirang Vaidya v. Union of India & Ors

Writ Petition (C) No. 84 of 2016

Chattisgarh High Court

The Petitioner has filed the case challenging the different dates of declaration of results of the Regional rounds of the Mathematical Olympiad.

The case is pending for final hearing

18. Ashutosh Tripathy v. Union of India & Ors

W.P.(C) No.635 of 2016

Orissa High Court

The Petitioner has filed the case challenging the different dates of declaration of results of the Regional rounds of the Mathematical Olympiad.

The matter is pending before the High Court.

19. NCBS v. The Commissioner BBMP, Bangalore

WP NO. 19467/2015


NCBS has filed the W.P. against the BBMP & Commissioner Of Police etc. Seeking removal of

Pending for submission of reply by the Respondents i.e BBMP


Case Name & No.

Case no.


unauthorised wall built by the residents on the public road adjacent to the compound wall of NCBS at CB site.

Commissioner and Police, Commissioner, Bangalore

20. Mr. Uday Kumar v. TIFR, National Balloon Facility, Hyderabad

Original Suit No. 247 of 2007

Civil Judge, Junior Division, Muddebihal, Vijayapur, Karnataka

The Suit had been filed demanding crops damage compensation.

An order has been passed in favour of TIFR.

21. Mr. Uday Kumar v. TIFR, National Balloon Facility, Hyderabad

R.A. No. 07 of 2011

Civil Judge, Senior Division, Muddebihal, Vijayapur, Karnataka

The Appeal has been filed by the Appellant against the order of the lower court.

The appeal is pending for hearing.

22. Rashmi Talore

v.

TIFR & Others

CGIT No. 2/52 of 2008

Central Govt. Industrial Tribunal (CGIT), Sion, Mumbai, Maharashtra

The Applicant had filed the case challenging her termination letter dated 26th July, 2007 issued by TIFR, Mumbai.

An award was passed on 17th July, 2014 dismissing the case.

23. Kalpnath Rai v. Union of India & Ors.

Writ Petition (C) No. 1529 of 2014

Delhi High Court

The Petitioner had raised a grievance against one of the participating institutions (other than TIFR or NCBS) of a common entrance exam conducted for admission to a course in Biology. The Petitioner has inter alia prayed for a direction to be issued to all the Respondents to strictly follow the procedure and criteria adopted by TIFR and NCBS

The case has been disposed off by an order dated 19th August, 2015 without any directions / orders against the Respondents.


Case Name & No.

Case no.


24. Awadesh Kumar v. Union of India & Ors.

CWJC no. 826 of 2016

Patna High Court

The Petitioner had filed the case challenging the different dates of declaration of results of the Regional rounds of the Mathematical Olympiad.

As per the Orders passed by the Court, an affidavit had been filed by HBCSE putting down a scheme of selection process for the year 2016-17 while stating that the same be changed in the interest of the Olympiads.

The case was disposed off vide Order dated 24th February, 2016 in light of the scheme submitted by HBCSE and the assurance given that utmost endeavor would be made to ensure that Regional round results are declared on one date.

25. Dr.Prabir Kumar Biswas & Anr. v. National Board for Higher Mathematics, DAE & Ors.

W.P. no 454 (W) of 2016

Calcutta High Court

The Petitioner had filed the case complaining that he had been unjustly prevented from participating in the 2nd round of the Indian Mathematical Olympiad exam. He had contended that his rank was 34 and that 35 students were entitled to be selected from the first round to give the second round of the Indian Mathematical Olympiad exam. As per the results from the 1st Mathematical Olympiad exam, only 30 names had been declared as qualifying for the second round of the said exam.

Upon a submission being made by the Advocate of Indian Statistical Institute (respondent No.5 & 6) that they had no objection to the Petitioner appearing for the 2nd round, an order (dated 4th January, 2016) was passed disposing off the matter allowing the Petitioner to take the 2nd round of the examination.

26. M/s Durgamba Tour & Travels, Bangalore

WP 2198/2016


M/s Durgamba Tours & Travels who were providing transport services submitted tender documents for new

Disposed off by the Hon’ble High Court by its Order dated 20th April, 2016.


Case Name & No.

Case no.


transport contract at NCBS. However since they could not technically qualify as per tender norms their financial bid was not opened. Aggrieved by this they filed this W.P.

27. Pritish Laxmikant Patil v. Union of India & Ors.

W.P. No. 6451 of 2011

High Court, Bombay, Appellate Side

The Petitioner had filed the case challenging the decision of the co-ordinator for the International Earth Science Olympiad whereby the Petitioner was prevented from participating and representing India in the International Earth Science Olympiad.

Disposed off vide order dated 30th September, 2011 without any orders against the Respondent.

28. Ishaan Preet Singh v. National Steering Committee & Ors.

Civil W.P. No. 5517 of 2011

High Court, Punjab & Haryana

The Petitioner had got marks above the cut-off in the second stage of examination. Upon his application for the same, his answer sheet was revaluated and the marks that he received upon revaluation were less than the cut-off. The Petitioner challenged the decision of the Respondents to not allow him to participate in the third stage of the exam as his marks upon revaluation were less than the cut-off.

Disposed off vide Order dated 19th July, 2011.


Annexure B2-H

Accounts TIFR NAAC Self Study Report 2016 Annex-B2-H








Date post:	29-Apr-2018
Category:	Documents
Upload:	buique
View:	214 times
Download:	1 times

B2 Annexures - Tata Institute of Fundamental …gsoffice/TIFR-naac/B2-annexures.pdfSilica Spheres...

Documents