NITYA NAND versus STATE OF HARYANA ANO ORS.

NITYA NAND versus STATE OF HARYANA ANO ORS.

The Rules provide that 'Floating Professor' is a distinct category from 'Associate Professor', as governed by Rule 10. When two persons are promoted substantively on the same date, the one who had already attained the distinct category of Floating Professor and drew a higher pay-scale must rank senior to the other. Seniority for different categories must be determined separately under Rule 13.

Parties
Appellant: Nitya Nand; Respondents: State of Haryana and Ors.
Jurisdiction
India
Judgment Date
13 November 2009
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appeal by Special Leave From High Court Judgment
Outcome
Appeal dismissed.
Legal Topics
Seniority, Promotion, Categorisation of Posts
Service Law Seniority Promotion Categorisation of Posts

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Legal principles 2 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Nitya Nand

Appellant

State of Haryana and Ors.

Respondents

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Appeal by Special Leave From High Court Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether 'Floating Professor' and 'Associate Professor' are different categories of posts in Haryana Medical Education Service
  2. 2 Whether respondent No. 4, having been selected as Floating Professor while appellant continued as Associate Professor prior to promotion as Senior Professor, must rank senior to the appellant to the post of Senior Professor

Ratio Decidendi

The Rules provide that 'Floating Professor' is a distinct category from 'Associate Professor', as governed by Rule 10. When two persons are promoted substantively on the same date, the one who had already attained the distinct category of Floating Professor and drew a higher pay-scale must rank senior to the other. Seniority for different categories must be determined separately under Rule 13.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed.

Orders

  • High Court judgment affirmed.
  • Respondent No. 4 to rank senior to the appellant to the post of Senior Professor.