New Delhi, Dec. 3: Ousted AIIMS boss P. Venugopal has the support of the country’s top court in his battle with the government, but is unlikely to make a triumphant return — at least not yet.

The Supreme Court today said it was “with” the “humiliated” director, but refused to stay the new law that led to his unceremonious exit last Friday.

“Factually we are with you…. But since a law has been passed, it is difficult for us,” a two-judge bench said while declining to pass an interim order in his favour.

The court, however, issued notices to the Union government, health minister Anbumani Ramadoss and the health secretary on the recently amended AIIMS act, and listed the matter for final hearing in January.

The amended law says any AIIMS director must step down after he turns 65 or completes five years in the post, whichever is earlier.

Venugopal, who has had a much-publicised difference of opinion with Ramadoss, turned 65 in July and claims the amendment was aimed at removing him, while the AIIMS Resident Doctors’ Association responded to the changed law with a decision to boycott outpatient department services.

The bench said it would “deliver” its judgment before July 2008, when Venugopal would have completed five years had he still been the director.

The court’s refusal to stay the amended law paved the way for the next senior-most AIIMS doctor, Tirath Das Dogra, to take over as acting director of the country’s premier medical institute.

The judges ordered Dogra to continue till the next date of hearing after former law minister Arun Jaitley, speaking for the AIIMS faculty, expressed fears that Ramadoss would be vindictive towards other doctors, too.

Jaitley said doctors “cannot function” with a “sword hanging over their heads” and pointed out that even Dogra had been suspended and was only continuing in office because of a high court order protecting him.

Earlier, Venugopal’s counsel F.S. Nariman argued that the law was targeted at a specific individual.

“It is a hostile discriminatory law on the face of it,” Nariman said. “He just has six months left…. He is one of India’s most outstanding individuals… and is being humiliated,” he said.

At this point, the court wondered “why such a respected person was being humiliated this way”.