Back
THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)
Michael Zothankhuma
Bidya Chakravorty And Ors W/o Mrinmoy Sarma – Appellant
Versus
State Of Assam – Respondent
JUDGMENT AND ORDER :
MICHAEL ZOTHANKHUMA, J.
1. Heard Mr. D. Das, learned Senior Counsel assisted by Mr. K. Mohammed, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. K. Gogoi, learned counsel for the State respondents.
2. The 24 petitioners’ case is that they have been appointed as Guests/Part- time Lecturers in the Polytechnics and Engineering Colleges of Assam and due to their long engagement, the respondent authorities should be directed to formulate a scheme for regularisation of their services, by absorbing them in the sanctioned posts of Lecturers in the respective Polytechnics and Engineering Colleges.
3. The petitioners’ counsel submits that though the present case is covered by the judgments dismissing the batch of writ petitions, the lead case being WP(C) 159/2025 (Pramila Kumari Prajapati and 34 others Vs. State of Assam and 4 others) and in WP(C) 8073/2019 (Rahul Amin Reza and 15 others Vs. State of Assam and 4 others), which have been upheld by the Division Bench in WA NO.49/2025 and WA 47/2025 respectively, the case of some of the petitioners, for example petitioner nos.12, 14, 15 & 20 are slightly different from the case of the other writ petitioners.
4. The petitioner
Long service on a contractual basis does not confer a legal right to regularization without a formal scheme in place, as established by Supreme Court precedents.
Temporary employees lack a legal right to regularization unless appointed per relevant rules; participation in selection waives claims for regularization.
Temporary or irregular employees lack a legal right to permanent status unless appointed per relevant rules, as established in Uma Devi (3).
Temporary employees cannot claim regularization without meeting Supreme Court criteria, including continuous service without interim protection.
Temporary appointments do not create a vested right for regularization unless specific conditions, including a minimum service period without interim protection, are met.
Temporary or contractual employees lack legal entitlement to regularization unless appointed through lawful selection processes as established by precedent.
Regularization of part-time employees must adhere to the principles of regular appointment and cannot be granted as a back-door entry.
The court recognized the right of the State to appoint persons on temporary basis to meet its exigencies, and held that the failure of the ATTC to maintain the student to lecturer ratio and the petit....
Long service on a contractual basis does not confer a right to regularization or equal pay as per established legal principles.
Contractual employees have no right to claim regularization or equivalent benefits unless stipulated by law, as established by precedent.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
