- (1.) Leave granted.
(2.) While Dr S. K. Kacker, an eminent professor in Otorhinolaryngology, was working as Professor and Head of the ENT Department in the respondent- AIIMS, an advertisement had come to be made on 29/6/1990 for appointment tothe post of Director of the AIIMS on regular basis. Pursuant thereto, he had applied for and was selected by the Committee for appointment as a Director. He came to be appointed by the Institute Body with the concurrence of the government of India. He assumed the office on 11/10/1990 for a period of five years. His tenure came to an end on 15/10/1995. We are not concerned with the interlude of his tenure being not extended as an interim Director pending regular selection. The question that emerges for consideration is whether on expiry of five years' tenure as Director, he would be entitled to go back as a Professor and Head of the ENT Department till he attains his superannuation on 31/7/1998 When he filed writ petition in the High court seeking one of the above reliefs, the division bench of the High court in the impugned judgment made on 19-7-1996 in Writ Petition No. 3865 of 1995 has rejected his claim holding that on appointment as Director, he ceased to be a Professor and he could not revert to the ENT Department. Thus, this appeal by special leave.
(3.) Shri Arun Jaitley, the learned Senior Counsel appearing for the appellant, has elaborately argued the case. Shri D. D. Thakur, the learned Senior Counsel and Ms Mukta Gupta, the learned counsel for the respondents, have resisted the contentions. The question arises whether the appellant on ceasing to be a Director on and from 15/10/1995 could revert to and continue in the post of Professor of the ENT Department till he attains the superannuation The main emphasis laid by Shri Jaitley is that the post of Director is not a permanent post. As per Regulation 22 of the Regulations of the AIIMS, there are only two categories of posts, namely, permanent post and temporary post; the tenure post is neither a permanent post nor a temporary post and that, therefore, on completion of his tenure as Director, he is entitled to revert to the post of Professor as Head of the Department in the ENT Department. In his absence, one Dr R. Ghosh was appointed as Professor and Head of the Department while the appellant retained his post as a Professor as disclosed from the Resolution passed by the Governing Body and approved by the Institute Body. The appellant, therefore, had not ceased to be a Professor. In that behalf, he laid great emphasis on Regulation 30-A of the Regulations which envisages putting an end to the tenure post either by the Institute Body by giving notice of three months or pay in lieu thereof or on the incumbent's himself ceasing to be a Director voluntarily giving three months' notice. It would, therefore, indicate that the post of Director is not a permanent post. Thereby, the appellant had not lost his lien in the post as a Professor and Head of the ENT Department.;