Srinagar, Aug 12: The High Court of Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh has upheld the retirement of an Associate Professor of Nursing at the Islamic University of Science and Technology (IUST) at the age of 60, ruling that the enhanced retirement age of 62 for University teachers does not apply to faculty of constituent colleges.

A Division Bench comprising Acting Chief Justice Sanjeev Kumar and Justice Mohd. Yousuf Wani dismissed a petition filed by Asmat Parveen, challenging her retirement from IUST’s Alamdar Memorial College of Nursing and Medical Technology.
The court noted that while IUST had enhanced the retirement age of its University teachers from 60 to 62 years, the Executive Council, while ratifying the decision in July 2020, had specifically excluded teachers serving in constituent colleges.
The petitioner had argued that she was entitled to the enhanced retirement age under IUST statutes and applicable regulations. She also relied on the case of another IUST faculty member who had reportedly been allowed to continue until 62.
The University, however, maintained that Parveen belonged to a separate cadre of Nursing faculty serving in a constituent college governed by a distinct regulatory framework.
The Bench observed that IUST’s statutes originally prescribed 60 years as the age of superannuation. Although an amendment providing for a higher retirement age had been approved earlier, it required the Chancellor’s assent, which was never granted.
Subsequently, the Vice-Chancellor increased the retirement age to 62 using emergency powers. However, while ratifying the decision, the Executive Council expressly stated that the benefit would not apply to constituent colleges.
The court also noted that a later University order implementing the enhanced retirement age had not reproduced the exclusion, but held that it had to be read alongside the Executive Council’s original decision.
The Bench further observed that Parveen had not specifically challenged either the Executive Council decision or the consequential University order before the Tribunal or the High Court.
The court declined to examine the broader question of whether IUST could legally classify constituent-college teachers separately, observing that the issue was not directly before it.
Holding that the University had followed the applicable statutes, the Bench concluded that Parveen was “rightly retired” on attaining 60 years and found no merit in her challenge.
The petition was accordingly dismissed. The judgment was reserved on August 6 and pronounced on August 11, 2026, at Srinagar.