THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)
HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE Michael Zothankhuma
Bidya Chakravorty And Ors W/o Mrinmoy Sarma - Appellant
Vs.
The State Of Assam And Ors. - Respondent
WP(C)/864/2023
Decided On : 07-03-2025
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 petitioners’ counsel submits that the petitioner No. 12 is a Guest/Part- time Assistant Professor/Lecturer in Mathematics in Jorhat Institute of Science and Technology (JIST) on contractual basis. Similarly, the petitioner Nos.1, 2, 7, 11 & 14 are Assistant Professors in Chemistry, while the petitioner Nos.5, 6 & 15 are Assistant Professors in Physics. The petitioner No. 20 is an Assistant Professor in Chemistry. They are all Guest/Part-time Faculty Members engaged on contractual basis in JIST even till today.
5. The petitioners’ counsel submits that while the State respondents have initiated a selection process through advertisement, for filling up the vacant sanctioned posts of Assistant Professor/Lecturers (Technical) and (Non- Technical) on regular basis, in the various Polytechnics and Engineering Colleges of Assam, the respondents are now seeking to terminate the services of all the petitioners. However, petitioner Nos. 1, 2, 5, 6, 7, 11, 12, 14, 15 & 20 posts cannot be said to be included within the posts of term Lecturers (Non-Technical), as they belong to the science stream.
6. The petitioners’ counsel submits that some of the petitioners belong to the Science stream, which is a completely different stream from Lecturers (Technical) and (Non-Technical). He submits that the post of Lecturers (Technical) is for those persons, who have a degree in Engineering. The post of Assistant Professor/Lecturer (Non-Technical) would be for those persons who do not have Engineering degrees and those persons in the Science stream. He submits that the subjects Mathematics, Chemistry and Physics belongs to the Science Stream and the same cannot be included in the posts of Assistant Professor/Lecturer (Non-Technical).
7. Mr. K. Gogoi, learned counsel for the State respondents, on the other hand, submits that the subjects, Mathematics, Chemistry, and Physics, all belong to the Non-Technical stream, along with Humanities, Commerce and English etc. He submits that there are only two streams in the various Polytechnics and Engineering Colleges of Assam, i.e., Technical and Non-Technical. The Technical Stream consist of those subjects providing Engineering degrees and the remaining subjects are all included within the Non-Technical stream.
8. Mr. K. Gogoi also submits that the present case is covered by the judgment and orders passed by this Court in WP(C) Nos. 159/2025 and 8073/2019, which have been upheld by the Division bench of this Court in WA Nos. 49/2025 and 47/2025 respectively. As such, the writ petition should be dismissed.
9. I have heard the learned counsels for the parties.
10. As can be seen from the submissions made by the learned counsels for the parties and from the pleadings, the writ petitioners are all engaged on contractual basis as Guest/Part-time Lecturers/A
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....
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.