The court examines whether an employee who failed to return to his original post after the expiry of a lien period can be reinstated based on academic excellence and proximity to retirement.

Linked Case : I.A.(Civil)/4202/2025

THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 2 ORS

REPRESENTED BY THE COMMISSIONER AND SECY. TO THE GOVT. OF ASSAM

HIGHER EDUCATION (TECHNICAL) DEPTT.

DISPUR

GUWAHATI 06

ASSAM.

2: THE DIRECTOR OF TECHNICAL EDUCATION

ASSAM

KAHILIPARA

DISPUR

GUWAHATI 781019

3: THE PRINCIPAL

JORHAT ENGINEERING COLLEGE

DIST. JORHAT

ASSAM 785007

VERSUS

DR BISWAJIT SARMA AND ANR

S/O LATE DUGDHA NATH SARMAH

R/O RAJAMAIDAM

P.S. AND P.O JORHAT

DIST .JORHAT

ASSAM 785001

2:THE ACCOUNTANT GENERAL

ASSAM MAIDAMGAON

GUWAHATI 781014

------------

For the appellant/petitioner(s) : Mr. K. Gogoi, SC, Higher Edn.

Mr. S. Das, Advocate

For the Respondent(s) : Mr. I. Choudhury, Sr. Advocate

Mr. T. Das, Advocate

B E F O R E –

–

HON’BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR. ASHUTOSH KUMAR

HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ARUN DEV CHOUDHURY

28.04.2026

(Ashutosh Kumar, CJ)

We have heard Mr. K. Gogoi, learned Advocate for the appellants/State of Assam and two others; and Mr. Indraneel Choudhury, learned senior Advocate for the respondent No. 1.

While serving as an Associate Professor in the department of Geology at Jorhat Engineering College, Jorhat, under the Government of Assam, the respondent No. 1 was appointed as the Director of College Development Council at the Gauhati University on a fixed-term basis for a period of five years, while retaining his lien to his original post in the Jorhat Engineering College for one year. He did not return to his original post at the Jorhat Engineering College even after the expiry of the lien period, nor was his belated request for extension of his lien period was responded to.

After serving the Gauhati University as the Director of College Development Council for five years, he was released by the Gauhati University, which release order was questioned by the respondent No. 1, but to no avail, as his employment was only for a period of five years.

Within the afore-noted period of five years, the respondent No. 1 ought to have assessed that his period of lien was going to be over and in case of any refusal for further extension of his lien in the Gauhati University, he would be rendered jobless.

It was only after his release form the position of the Director of College Development Council at the Gauhati University that the respondent No. 1 tried to rejoin on the post of Associate Professor in Geology at Jorhat Engineering College, which had given him lien only for one year, notwithstanding the fact that the respondent No. 1 had obtained employment in the Gauhati University for a period of five years only.

Mr. Choudhury, learned senior Advocate representing the respondent No. 1 has submitted that with such high academic qualification of the respondent No. 1, such a rigid stand ought not to be taken by the Jorhat Engineering College, especially when the respondent No. 1 is not claiming any back wages or other benefits. He ought to be taken back in service for two reasons; one being that his talent, which he had acquired over the period of time, ought not to be wasted; and the other being that a very short period of time has remained for him to superannuate.

Mr. Gogoi, learned counsel for the appellants shall get back to the Jorhat Engineering College administration and would explore the feasibility of taking the respondent No.1 back in service, considering his academic excellence.

Let this matter come up for consideration on 09.06.2026