Tripura University’s Delay in Complying with High Court Order Raises Questions Over Administrative Transparency

By Our Correspondent

Agartala, September 6, 2026

Concerns have been raised over what stakeholders describe as an inordinate delay by Tripura University (TU) in complying with a recent order of the Tripura High Court directing the university to publish the select list for the post of Deputy Registrar under the Scheduled Caste (SC) category.

The issue stems from WPC No. 734/2024, filed by Sri Krishna Das. While disposing of the petition on August 20, 2026, Justice SD Purukhayastha directed Tripura University and the concerned respondents to publish the select list of SC candidates for the post of Deputy Registrar within one week of receiving a copy of the order.

In the operative portion of the judgment, the High Court specifically directed:

“The respondent nos.1 to 3, 6 and 7 are directed to publish the select list of SC candidates for said post of Deputy Registrar within one week of receipt of copy of this order.”

The petitioner had challenged the appointment of Dr. Muneendra Mishra to the Deputy Registrar post under the Unreserved (UR) category, questioning, among other issues, whether Dr. Mishra possessed the requisite administrative experience. The petitioner had also alleged that he was not issued a call letter to appear in the interview for the UR-category post.

At the same time, the petitioner was called for the interview for the SC-category Deputy Registrar post and appeared before the interview board. However, according to the petitioner's case, Tripura University did not publish the outcome of that interview.

The recruitment process itself dates back to November 2023, when Tripura University issued a common advertisement for the two posts vide Advertisement No. F. TU/REG/ADVT/NT/01/2023 dated November 10, 2023. The university subsequently appointed Dr. Mishra to the UR-category post on November 8, 2024, while the issue concerning the SC-category selection remained unresolved.

The High Court's order also laid down a specific mechanism in the event that the petitioner does not find a place in the SC-category select list.

The court observed that if the petitioner is unsuccessful in the SC-category selection, he would be at liberty to approach the concerned university authority within one week and seek an opportunity to appear before the interview board against the UR quota.

If such an application is made, the High Court directed that the petitioner's interview should be conducted within four weeks from the date of his application, followed by publication of a fresh UR-category merit list within two weeks of the interview.

The court further observed that, if necessary in that process, the university authorities would be at liberty to cancel the existing appointment of the concerned candidate.

The delay in publishing the SC-category interview result has now become a matter of concern among stakeholders, particularly because the High Court has already issued a clear direction prescribing a specific timeline for publication.

Stakeholders argue that publication of results following a competitive recruitment process is a fundamental component of transparency, accountability and fairness in public-sector and university recruitment. They contend that such information should ordinarily be disclosed by the recruiting authority without requiring judicial intervention.

more news...