With the dismissal of his appeal, Prof Subramanian, who has been for the past one and a half months fighting for his reinstallation at ICHR, will now have to return to his parent department in the university. Prof Subramanian's appeal against justice K. Ramamoorthy's order lifting the ex-parte stay on his repatriation to the university was dismissed earlier this week by a division bench comprising of the acting chief justice Y K Sabharwal and justice K.S. Gupta.

The division bench was of the view that there was no grounds to interfere in the matter when the single judge, who granted the ex-parte stay, had himself lifted the stay while admitting Prof Subramanian's writ for hearing.

On September 4, passing an interim stay on the repatriation of Prof Subramaniyan as member-secretary, justice Ramamurthy had restrained the chairman of the newly-constituted council -- a majority of whom are charged with harbouring pro-BJP inclinations -- from interfering in the functioning of Prof Subramaniyan in any manner. But earlier in October, the judge heard counsel for ICHR R.K. Anand and revoked the stay on his repatriation, paving the way for his returning back to his parent department in the Delhi University.

Prof Subramanian contended before the division bench that though monetarily he would benefit on his return to the university, the exit of a historian of repute from the ICHR in this manner would send a wrong signal for all historians wanting to work in the research field and join ICHR.

The ousted member-secretary alleged that the repatriation was done because its chairman Sattar had a personal malafide against him as he was trying to bring in discipline in ICHR.

He contended that the government, by inducting all `rightist' members in the council and the chairman by toeing the line of the BJP government, were trying to end the secular nature of the council. However, the bench was of the view that Prof Subramanian had not made Sattar a party in the original writ or the appeal to prove that he (the chairman) had any malafide against him. In view of this, there was nothing to prove that Prof Subramaniam was repatriated because of any personal differences between him and the chairman.

The counsel said that his client was sent under deptutation by the Delhi university after ICHR appointed him for a three year tenure to serve as member-secretary and hence it cannot terminate his written appointment in this manner and order his repatriation to the university. ``It (ICHR) had no right to do so as this was against the conditions of appointment,'' he argued.

But, the judges remained unconvinced by the arguments of the counsel for Prof Subramanian on the question whether there was any impediment in the repatriation of any member from ICHR.

The bench, while refusing the entertain the appeal said that if his contentions were true they would be judged when his writ would come up for hearing before the single judge.