+
 
For the best experience, open
m.thewire.in
on your mobile browser or Download our App.

J&K Lecturer, Suspended for Appearing in Article 370 Hearing, Reinstated After SC Intervention

Documents show Zahoor Ahmad Bhat had applied for a two-day leave and mentioned that he was to appear in the apex court.
The Supreme Court of India. Photo: Pinakpani/Wikimedia Commons. CC BY-SA 4.0.

Srinagar: In what is understood to largely be a damage control exercise, the Jammu and Kashmir government has reinstated a lecturer, who was suspended by it after he had argued against the reading down of Article 370 in the Supreme Court.

Zahoor Ahmad Bhat’s suspension was revoked by the Union Territory’s administration after the apex court itself had asked the Attorney General to talk to J&K’s Lieutenant Governor Manoj Sinha on the matter and remarked that government action may be seen as retribution.

The administration said he was “reinstated after careful deliberation and attending circumstances.”

Swift suspension and backtracking

The J&K government had suspended Zahoor Ahmad Bhat on August 25, two days after he had appeared in the Supreme Court and argued against the BJP-led Union government’s August 5, 2019 decisions on Kashmir.

A withdrawal order was issued by Alok Kumar, Principal Secretary of the School Education Department on September 2. It reads:

“Having regard to the attending circumstances and after careful deliberations, the Government order No. 251-JK (Edu) of 2023 dated 25.08.2023 issued under endorsement No. Edu- Lect/96/2023(7272273) dated 25.08.2023 is withdrawn forthwith.”

The also means that the inquiry ordered against Bhat has also been withdrawn by the government.

Immediately after the withdrawal of the controversial order, the Director of School Education in Jammu issued another order, on September 3, asking Bhat to rejoin at the place where he was originally posted, the Government Boys Higher Secondary School, at Jawahar Nagar in Srinagar.

The reversal of its own action by the government after the Supreme Court intervention unambiguously establishes that Bhat was suspended for appearing in the Article 370 case.

On August 23, Bhat, who is also a law graduate, had argued against the reading down of Article 370 and reorganisation of J&K into two Union territories in the Supreme Court.

In its suspension order, the government had cited violation of rules governing an employee.

“Pending enquiry into his conduct, Mr Zahoor Ahmad Bhat, Senior Lecturer, Political Science, presently posted at Government Higher Secondary School Jawahar Nagar Srinagar, is hereby placed under suspension with immediate effect for violation of provisions of J&K CSR, Jammu and Kashmir Government Employees (Conduct) Rules 1971, J&K Leave Rules,” the School Education Department had said.

However, documents accessed by The Wire shows that Bhat had applied for two days leave on August 22 and 23, in advance on August 21. In his leave request, he had clearly cited his appearance in the Supreme Court.

The principal of the Boys Higher Secondary School at Jawahar Nagar, in his report to the director of School Education in Kashmir, on August 25, submitted that the lecturer had applied for two days leave for appearance in his case in the Supreme Court. But despite this report, Bhat was suspended on the same day.

Suspension raised before Supreme Court

On August 28, senior Supreme Court lawyer Kapil Sibal raised the issue of suspension of Bhat before the five-judge constitution bench, which is hearing petitions on the Article 370 move daily.

“He (Bhat) argued here for a few minutes and he has been suspended. This was after he argued here…This is unfair, I am sure the AG will look at it,” Sibal informed the court.

After Sibal drew the attention of the court towards the matter, Solicitor General Tushar Mehta submitted that “what has been reported in newspapers may not be whole truth” and “he appears in other courts also”.

The CJI then directed the Attorney General to talk to J&K’s Lieutenant Governor on the matter and see what has happened.

Justice B.R. Gavai, another judge on the bench, said that if it has happened due to appearance before the Supreme Court, then it is indeed retribution.

Make a contribution to Independent Journalism
facebook twitter