Case Note & Summary
The dispute arose between two Professors at 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 challenged the seniority of the appellant, claiming that only those appointed through regular selection should be considered for seniority. The university maintained that both Professors were treated equally in the seniority list. The first respondent's challenge led to a writ petition in the Allahabad High Court, which ruled in his favor, prompting the appellant to appeal to the Supreme Court. The court analyzed the Merit Promotion Scheme established by the University Grants Commission, which aimed to recognize outstanding work by university teachers and provide opportunities for professional advancement. The court noted that the Executive Council of the university had framed regulations for determining inter se seniority, treating all Professors as belonging to the same cadre. The court distinguished the case from previous judgments that limited the scope of the Merit Promotion Scheme, asserting that the Aligarh Muslim University Act did not restrict appointments to direct recruitment only. The court ultimately held that the appellant was entitled to seniority over the first respondent and all consequential benefits, allowing the appeal and setting aside the High Court's order without costs.
Headnote
A) Administrative Law - Seniority Determination - Inter se seniority between Professors - Aligarh Muslim University Act, 1920, Sections 2(k), 5(7), 24, 25, 27, 30 - The court examined the validity of seniority determination between Professors appointed under the Merit Promotion Scheme and those appointed through direct recruitment, concluding that both belong to the same cadre and the appellant is entitled to seniority. Held that the regulations framed by the Executive Council govern the seniority and the appellant is entitled to all consequential benefits (Paras 1-7).
Issue of Consideration
Whether the appellant, promoted under the Merit Promotion Scheme, is entitled to seniority over the first respondent, who was appointed through regular selection.
Final Decision
The Supreme Court allowed the appeal, set aside the Allahabad High Court's order, and held that the appellant is entitled to seniority over the first respondent and all consequential benefits.
Law Points
- Seniority determination
- Merit Promotion Scheme
- University governance
- Academic appointments
- Statutory powers
