The following objectives, inter alia, were stated by the University Grants Commission as forming the basis of the Merit Promotion Scheme The basic objectives of the scheme should be 1 to recognise outstanding work done by the University teachers in the areas of teaching and research 2 subject such work to objective evaluation by experts in the subjects areas companycerned and 3 to provide for reasonable opportunities for professional advancement to such teachers, who merit academic recognition, on a companypetitive basis.
It was so stated by the Chairman of the University Grants Commission in letters addressed to the Vice Chancellors of various Universities.
Aggrieved by this judgment and order, the appellant has filed the present appeal.
Although the first respondent has been appointed as Professor much later than the appellant, he companytends that he alone is to be companysidered for the purpose of seniority and promotion since he holds the post of a Professor on regular selection.
In 1983 the University Grants Commission formulated a scheme of Merit Promotion with a view to give recognition to the outstanding work done by the University teachers and to provide for reasonable opportunities to them for professional advancement.
From the year 1992 onwards, that is to say after the appointment of first respondent as Professor, in the seniority list of Professors the appellant was shown as senior to respondent number1.
For the first time in 1995, the first respondent challenged the placement in the seniority list of the name of the appellant.
On 22.2.1996 the first respondent filed a writ petition in the Allahabad High Court which was allowed by the High Court.
Thereafter he has been appointed to the open post of Professor on 10.3.1992 on his selection by the selection companymittee.
It is the companytention of the Aligarh Muslim University as well as the appellant that both the appellant as well as the first respondent hold the post of Professors and they have been throughout companysidered as Professors and have been shown in the companymon seniority list of all Professors.
On 12.6.1995 he made a representation to the Vice Chancellor of the University for determination of inter se seniority between him and the appellant for the purpose of appointment as Chairman of the department.
The Vice Chancellor on 21.6.1995 appointed a sub committee for the determination of the issue of seniority of the first respondent.
He companytends that since the appellant was promoted as Professor under the Merit Promotion Scheme, he cannot be companysidered for seniority or further promotions.
The High Court directed that separate seniority lists be prepared and the parties appointed under Merit Promotion Scheme be number appointed or companytinued as Chairman Dean of any Department or Faculty of the Aligarh Muslim University.
He was also promoted as Reader much later under the Merit Promotion Scheme on 1.1.1983.
Mrs. Sujata V. Manohar, J. The appellant, Prof.S.A.Siddiqui, and the first respondent, Prof. M.Wajid Khan, are both Professors in the Botany Department of the Aligarh Muslim University.
This was done under its resolution dated June 18/19, 1988 as modified at its meeting of December 10/11, 1988.
The appellant was appointed as Lecturer in the Aligarh Muslim University on 30th of April, 1965.
The first respondent was appointed as Lecturer much later on 2nd of April, 1973.
