Madhya Pradesh High Court Stays Appointment of Junior Professor as Principal for Not Following Seniority Norms

The Madhya Pradesh High Court has issued a stay on the appointment of a junior professor as the principal of a government girls' college, highlighting the importance of adhering to established procedures regarding seniority in such appointments. The court's decision came in response to a petition filed by the senior-most professor at the Government M.H. Home Science Girls P.G. College (Autonomous), Jabalpur, who challenged the appointment of a colleague junior to him by over six years.

The petitioner, serving as a professor since February 2012, contended that the state government's circular mandates the appointment of the senior-most professor as the in-charge principal. Despite this, the authorities appointed Respondent No. 5, who had been a professor at the college only since 2018, thereby overlooking the petitioner's seniority. This action was perceived as a clear deviation from the prescribed norms, prompting the petitioner to seek judicial intervention.

Justice Vishal Mishra, presiding over the case, observed that it was incumbent upon the respondents to demonstrate that the appointed individual was indeed senior to the petitioner. Given the apparent lapse in following the government's directive on seniority, the court found merit in the petitioner's plea. Consequently, an interim relief was granted, staying the appointment order dated November 8, 2024, concerning Respondent No. 5's elevation to the principal's position. The court also allotted four weeks for the state to file its response to the petition.

In defense, the counsel for Respondent No. 5 argued that the petitioner had delayed filing the petition and, therefore, could not claim any rights based on previous orders. They further asserted that Respondent No. 5 met all the necessary criteria for the principal's role and had participated in the selection process accordingly. However, the court emphasized that the core issue was the adherence to the seniority principle as outlined in the government's circular, which appeared to have been neglected in this instance.

This case underscores the judiciary's role in ensuring that administrative decisions, especially those concerning appointments in educational institutions, align with established policies and procedures. The High Court's intervention serves as a reminder to state authorities about the importance of transparency and fairness in appointments, particularly when specific guidelines, such as those pertaining to seniority, are in place.

The matter remains under judicial consideration, with the court awaiting the state's detailed response. The outcome of this case could have broader implications for appointment practices in government colleges across Madhya Pradesh, reinforcing the necessity for strict adherence to procedural norms to uphold institutional integrity and staff morale.