Case Note & Summary
The dispute arose between two Professors in the Botany Department of Aligarh Muslim University regarding their seniority. The appellant, Prof. S.A. Siddiqui, was appointed as a Lecturer in 1965 and promoted to Professor in 1987 under the Merit Promotion Scheme. The first respondent, Prof. M.Wajid Khan, was appointed as a Lecturer in 1973 and became a Professor in 1992 through regular selection. The first respondent contended that he should be considered senior due to his regular appointment, while the appellant argued that both were recognized as Professors and listed in the common seniority list. The first respondent challenged the seniority list in 1995, leading to a High Court ruling that directed separate seniority lists and barred those promoted under the Merit Promotion Scheme from holding certain positions. The appellant appealed this decision. The Supreme Court examined the Merit Promotion Scheme established by the University Grants Commission, which aimed to recognize outstanding work and provide professional advancement opportunities. The court noted that the Executive Council of the university had framed regulations governing inter se seniority, treating all Professors as part of the same cadre, regardless of their appointment method. The court distinguished the case from previous rulings that limited the scope of merit promotions under other statutes, affirming that the Aligarh Muslim University Act did not restrict appointment methods. Ultimately, the court ruled in favor of the appellant, reinstating his seniority and all consequential benefits, while setting aside the High Court's order without costs.
Headnote
A) Administrative Law - Seniority Determination - Inter se seniority between Professors appointed under Merit Promotion Scheme and regular posts - Aligarh Muslim University Act, 1920, Sections 2(k), 5(7), 24, 25, 27, 30 - The court held that the regulations framed by the Executive Council for determining seniority among Professors, regardless of the method of appointment, were valid and applicable, thus entitling the appellant to seniority over the first respondent. (Paras 6-7).
Issue of Consideration
Whether the appellant, promoted under the Merit Promotion Scheme, is entitled to seniority over the first respondent, appointed through regular selection.
Final Decision
The Supreme Court allowed the appeal, reinstated the appellant's seniority over the first respondent, and set aside the High Court's order without costs.
Law Points
- Seniority determination
- Merit Promotion Scheme
- University governance
- Academic appointments
- Statutory powers
