JUDGMENT :

Kausik Chanda, J.

The petitioner was appointed as an Assistant Professor in the Department of Journalism and Mass Communication at Aliah University on February 28, 2013. The appointment letter of the petitioner indicated that she would remain on probation for a period of one year or till such time as could be decided by the university with effect from the date of her joining.

2. After the completion of one year probation period, a meeting of the Evaluation Committee of the university was held to consider the confirmation of the petitioner’s service. The subject expert recommended that the probation period of the petitioner should be extended by a further period of one year though there was a recommendation by the concerned head of the department to confirm the service of the petitioner. On May 15, 2014, the Council of the university resolved to extend the probation period of the petitioner till March 19, 2015.

3. The Council of the university in its meeting held on April 11, 2015, discussed the petitioner’s confirmation of service along with twelve other teachers. The Executive Council resolved that recommendations from the respective head of departments will be required for their services for confirmation of the service. It appears that on July 21, 2015, a guest teacher of the university lodged a complaint against the petitioner before the university alleging that the petitioner was irregular in her duty and abusive at workplace. On July 31, 2015, the head of the department forwarded the self-appraisal report of the petitioner suggesting that the petitioner was irregular and irresponsible in her duties. The petitioner also on August 12, 2015, lodged a complaint against her head of the department alleging harassment at the workplace. The Council of the university resolved from a three-member Facts Finding Committee to enquire into the allegations made against the petitioner, and the Facts Finding Committee on January 28, 2016, submitted its report before the university.

4. Thereafter, the university formed an Evaluation Committee for consideration of the confirmation of service of the petitioner. On April 8, 2016, a hearing committee was formed and the said committee on April 11, 2016, dismissed the complaints lodged by the petitioner holding that she has failed to substantiate the allegations made in her complaint dated August 12, 2015. On October 3, 2016, the Council of the university after reviewing the Evaluation Committee report dated October 01, 2016, as well as the Facts Finding Committee’s report resolved not to extend the probationary period of the petitioner anymore and terminated her service due to unsatisfactory performance and negligence of duty.

5. The said order was communicated to the petitioner by a letter dated October 4, 2016. In the letter of termination, it was mentioned that the petitioner had been dismissed from service by Aliah University on the purported ground of unsatisfactory performance as well as being detrimental to the best interest of the university.

6. The petitioner has challenged the said communication dated October 4, 2016, by filing this writ petition before this Court.

7. It has been submitted by the petitioner that in terms of the University Grants Commission Regulations on Minimum Qualifications for Appointment of Teachers and Other Academic Staff in Universities and Colleges and Measures for the Maintenance of Standards in Higher Education, 2010 (In short, the UGC Regulations, 2010), the university should have confirmed the service of the petitioner automatically on completion of one year of service. It has further been argued by the petitioner that the order of termination is stigmatic and therefore, the service of the petitioner could not have been terminated without a proper disciplinary proceeding.

8. The petitioner further contends that as per Rule 57 (3) of Aliah University’s further Statute, the petitioner is liable to be mandatorily confirmed in her post after the expiry of o