High Court Stays Tripura University’s Move to Discontinue Contractual Assistant Professor After 18 Years of Service
By Our Correspondent
Agartala, May 9, 2026
In a significant interim relief, the High Court of Tripura has stayed the decision of Tripura University to discontinue the services of contractual Assistant Professor Sri Sumanta Saha and directed the university authorities to immediately re-engage him in the post he had been holding until final disposal of the writ petition. The order was passed by Mr Justice Biswajit Palit in IA No.01 of 2026 arising out of W.P.(C) No.314 of 2026.
The petitioner, Sri Sumanta Saha, son of Sri Suresh Chandra Saha and a resident of Unnayan Sangha near Sankaracharya School at AD Nagar in Agartala, approached the High Court challenging the decision of Tripura University to discontinue his service as Assistant Professor (Contractual) in the Department of Information Technology after serving the institution continuously for nearly 18 years.
The respondents in the case are Tripura University represented by its Registrar, the Vice Chancellor of Tripura University, the Registrar (I/C), the Head of the Department of Information Technology, the University Grants Commission (UGC), the All India Council for Technical Education (AICTE), and Dr Abhirupa Roy, Assistant Professor of the Department of Tourism Administration, Tripura University.
Senior Advocate Mr Purusuttam Roy Barman assisted by Advocate Mr Samarjit Bhattacharjee appeared on behalf of the applicant-petitioner, while Advocate Mr Tapas Kumar Debbarma represented the respondent university authorities.
During the hearing, the petitioner’s counsel informed the Court that Tripura University had issued an advertisement on September 17, 2007 for filling up six posts of Lecturer for the School of IT and Computer Science. Sri Sumanta Saha applied for the post, appeared in the interview process and was selected following a resolution adopted by the Executive Council of the University on December 17, 2007. Subsequently, through a memorandum dated January 3, 2008, he was appointed as Lecturer on contractual basis for one year and later continued in service through repeated extensions year after year till January 2026.
The petitioner further submitted before the Court that although he had continuously served the university for almost 18 years, his candidature for regular appointment was not accepted despite participating in recruitment processes conducted by the university. It was also brought to the notice of the Court that the petitioner had earlier approached the High Court seeking absorption in service and the Court had directed the university to consider his case in view of his long years of service. However, his representation was later rejected by the university authorities.
The present dispute arose after the Registrar (I/C) of Tripura University issued a communication dated April 24, 2026 directing the Head of the Department of Information Technology not to allow Sri Sumanta Saha to continue his duties as Assistant Professor (Contractual) as his contractual engagement had not been extended. Challenging this communication, the petitioner sought quashing of the discontinuation order along with regularization, arrear salary, regular pay scale benefits and reinstatement.
Counsel for Tripura University argued before the Court that the petitioner had only been engaged on contractual basis and therefore could not claim regularization as a matter of right. The university also opposed the interim relief sought by the petitioner.
However, after hearing both sides, Hon’ble Justice Biswajit Palit made strong observations regarding the conduct of the university authorities. The Court observed that the university had continued to take service from the petitioner from 2008 to 2026 by repeatedly extending his contractual engagement. The Court further noted that after utilizing his services for such a long period, the sudden decision to discontinue him without giving any opportunity for absorption or appointment appeared shocking and arbitrary.
The High Court held that the principles of natural justice had been violated and prima facie found the discontinuation order to be illegal. Consequently, the Court restrained the university authorities from giving effect to the communication dated April 24, 2026 and directed the respondents to re-engage Sri Sumanta Saha in the post he had earlier occupied, if he had already been discontinued, till final disposal of the writ petition.
The interim application was accordingly disposed of by the High Court.
more news...