Supreme Court Reinstates Two Assistant Professors At Sher-I-Kashmir Institute Of Medical Sciences, Explains Bond Relating To Employer Sponsoring Employee’s Educational Advancement

The Appeals before the Apex Court challenged the correctness of a judgment and the order of the Jammu and Kashmir High Court, whereby appointments as Assistant Professors, granted to the appellants, namely, Dr. Sheikh Javeed Ahmad & Dr. Abdul Hamid Rather, were set aside as being incompatible with the rules and regulations, and the reviews sought thereagainst being dismissed as well.

The 3-Judge Bench of Justice Vikram Nath, Justice Sanjay Karol and Justice Sandeep Mehta ordered, "...we are of the view that the appellants are entitled to and deserve to be reinstated in service as Assistant Professors with continuity in service."

Referring to the Notification blocking two positions of Assistant Professor for the appellants, the Bench explained, “It makes clear that the two candidates would be sponsored for two-year diploma in their specialty, and subsequent to the completion of which, they would serve the institution for seven years in accordance with the necessary bond/agreement, which will have to be executed. A bond or agreement of this nature is formed when the employer financially supports the educational advancement of one of its employees, who is then expected to return and contribute to the employer's growth with the newly acquired experience and knowledge for a specific period.”

“The condition is that if such an employee fails to do so, the bond they have executed, which may be for a specified amount of money, shall be forfeited, or the amount paid by the employer in sponsoring such education shall have to be returned”, it added.

Senior Advocate Gaurav Pachnanda represented the Appellant while Advocate G.M. Kawoosa represented the Respondent.

Factual Background

The authorities of the State issued an advertisement to fill positions of Professors, Associate Professors and Assistant Professors at the Sher-I-Kashmir Institute of Medical Sciences, Soura, Srinagar. The Appellants herein applied for the position of Assistant Professors; however, they were adjudged ineligible. Subsequently, the Apical Selection Committee, recommended the appointment of the two Appellants as Senior Residents in Physical Medicine & Rehabilitation, as well as their sponsorship for a two-year diploma in the speciality.

The appellants were appointed to such positions (Senior Residents), but due to certain difficulties, the two-year diploma could not fructify. Consequently, the appellants undertook the short-term training program at AIIMS Delhi. A fresh advertisement for recruitment was issued for the vacancies which remained unfilled. The record revealed that SKIMS (Sher-I-Kashmir Institute of Medical Sciences) acknowledged that the efforts made to secure positions in a two-year diploma course for the appellants had not yielded results. It was further stated that since they had completed the training offered in Delhi, they could be considered for the position of Assistant Professor.

In 2010, a Notification was issued appointing the instant appellants as Assistant Professors in the said department. However, on November 3, 2010, they were relieved of their duties as senior residents. The public interest litigation, under Section 103 of the J&K Constitution, came to be filed before the High Court seeking to set aside/cancel the appointment of the instant appellants as Assistant Professors. The same was dismissed, and the appointments, as such, were set aside. Aggrieved thereby, the appellants approached the Apex Court.

Reasoning

The Bench noted that the basis of the conclusion drawn by the High Court was that there was nothing on record to show that the appellant had made efforts to be admitted into the institutes offering the diploma and that their candidature had, after due consideration, been rejected. The Bench found this to be a mistaken position of fact. The Notification issued by the competent authority, blocking two positions of Assistant Professor for the appellants, made it clear that the two candidates would be sponsored for two-year diploma in their specialty, and after the completion of which, they would serve the institution for seven years by the necessary bond/agreement, which will have to be executed.

On a perusal of the facts of the case, the Bench noted that SKIMS was the one who had to make arrangements to secure admission for the appellants. The Bench also noticed that the appellants did undertake Physical Medicine & Rehabilitation training at AIIMS and Dr. Sheikh Javeed Ahmad, who is the first appellant, even secured a letter of recommendation by the Head of Department, AIIMS Delhi.

Moreover, the posts blocked in favour of the appellants lived in the pendency of these proceedings since they had remained vacant for more than two years. Thus, the Bench held that the appellants were entitled to and deserved to be reinstated in service as Assistant Professors.

“All other benefits, pecuniary and non-pecuniary, would accrue to them as well, save and except back wages, from the date of their removal till their reinstatement, which shall take place forthwith”, it held. Thus, allowing the appeal, the Bench further ordered the revival of the two specific posts blocked for the appellants.

Cause Title: Sheikh Javeed Ahmad & Anr. v. State of J&k & Ors (Neutral Citation: 2025 INSC 624)

Appearance:

Appellant: Senior Advocates Gaurav Pachnanda, A.M. Magrey, Advocates Nitish Gupta, Farman Ali, Nikita Jaitely, Dhruv Arora, AOR Chandra Prakash

Respondent: Advocate G.M. Kawoosa, AOR Pashupathi Nath Razdan

Click here to read/download Judgment