Srinagar, Oct 15: The University of Kashmir’s new policy restricting professors serving beyond 62 years of age from taking up fresh administrative assignments has raised questions about the principles governing academic leadership, the treatment of serving office-holders and the scope of discretionary powers retained by the Vice-Chancellor.

The notification, issued last week, allows professors whose service beyond 62 years has been approved to continue in their existing administrative or academic assignments until the expiry of their prescribed tenure, subject to annual performance review. At the same time, it provides that such professors shall ordinarily not be considered for fresh administrative or tenure-based positions during their extended service.
Several Professors said that the distinction between continuing in an existing position and receiving a fresh assignment is central to the framework. While the policy seeks to regulate appointments during extended service, it permits existing office-holders to complete their tenure, provided their performance remains satisfactory. The notification does not explain the specific considerations that led the University to adopt this distinction.
"The policy also places annual performance review at the centre of continuation in administrative office. An adverse review or an assessment of unsatisfactory performance may lead the competent authority to discontinue an assignment before its scheduled expiry. The notification does not set out detailed assessment criteria, the process for communicating adverse findings or any review mechanism for an office-holder affected by such a decision," said a Professor.
He said that another significant provision concerns the appointment of Deans of Schools. "Although professors srving beyond 62 years will ordinarily not be considered for such nominations, the Vice-Chancellor may make an exception where academic requirements or institutional interests warrant it, including when no other suitable eligible professor is available."
The provision gives the Vice-Chancellor discretion to consider exceptional cases individually. The notification, however, does not elaborate on how competing claims of academic necessity and institutional interest will be assessed or what safeguards will ensure consistency in the exercise of that discretion.
The policy has been framed following recommendations of a committee constituted through a notice dated August 4, 2026, and approved by the Vice-Chancellor. It applies to existing and future cases involving professors whose service beyond 62 years has been approved under the enhanced superannuation policy.
The notification does not specify whether the new framework was prompted by particular administrative disputes, concerns over succession planning or a broader review of university governance. It also does not provide comparative details about how similar arrangements were previously handled.
The key question is whether the framework will produce a transparent and predictable system for assigning administrative responsibilities during extended service, while ensuring that academic leadership positions remain accessible to eligible faculty members. Clear performance benchmarks, consistent application of the exception clause and transparent decisions would be important to establishing confidence in its implementation.