A writ court cannot extend the duration of an expired fixed-term contract; termination due to unsatisfactory performance in a contract is not a stigma and is subject to limited judicial review, with remedies for breach of contract limited to civil damages.

ORDER

Heard Mr. S.K. Talukdar, learned counsel for the writ petitioner. Also heard Mr. D. Bora, learned counsel appearing for the respondent Nos. 2 and 3.

2. The petitioner by way of instituting the preset writ petition has assailed an order dated 02-06-2025, passed by the Chief Executive Officer of Assam Skilled University Project relieving the petitioner from his contractual engagement as Finance Manager w.e.f. 05-06-2025.

3. As projected in the writ petition, the petitioner in pursuance to a process of recruitment was selected for the post of Finance Manager. The select list in this connection was so published on 21-05-2022. Thereafter, vide a communication dated 21-05-2022, the petitioner was offered the post of Finance Manager, Project Management Unit of Assam Skilled University Project (ASUP) and he was required to join the organization on 01-06-2022. Thereafter, the petitioner had executed an agreement on 10-03-2023, with the Chief Executive Officer (CEO), ASUP. In terms of the said agreement the engagement of the petitioner as Finance Manager was to commence from 01-07-2022. Clause-3 of the said agreement mandates that the engagement was purely contractual and shall automatically terminate after 31-05-2023, if not terminated earlier, based on unsatisfactory performance/ conduct as solely determined by the CEO or extended based on satisfactory performance/ conduct as determined by the CEO and/ or linked to further extension of the project period by Govt. of Assam, Govt. of India and also Asian Development Bank. The said agreement was, thereafter, renewed and the contractual engagement of the petitioner was extended from 01-06-2023 to 30-04-2024. However, vide an order dated 16-10-2023 issued by the CEO, ASUP, the contractual services of the petitioner came to be terminated for the reasons assigned therein. On the termination of the contractual engagement of the petitioner, an advertisement dated 02-12-2023, came to be issued scheduling a walk in interview dated 05-12-2023, for the post held by the petitioner till date of his termination. The petitioner being aggrieved by his termination of the contractual agreement had approached this Court by instituting a writ petition being W.P.(C) No. 7010/2023. A coordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 28-02-2024, noticing that the termination of the contractual engagement of the petitioner was so effected without affording to him an opportunity of hearing proceeded to interfere with the impugned order dated 16-10-2023, terminating the contractual engagement of the petitioner with a further direction to reinstate the petitioner back in service. Thereafter, the CEO, ASUP vide a communication dated 27-05-2025, required the petitioner to submit a written response within 48 hours for internal review as to why he may not be considered for relieving from the project responsibilities. In the said communication it was highlighted that on account of recent failure on the part of the petitioner to initiate the necessary discussions with the TA Consultant have reflected a serious oversight on his part and a negligence has resulted in an incorrect Annual Expenditure and Financial Statement (AEFS) being submitted which has the effect of questioning the diligence with which he was discharging his responsibilities. The petitioner has submitted his response to th