1. Heard Learned Senior Counsel, Mr. P. Roy Barman assisted by Learned Counsel, Mr. S. Bhattacharjee appearing on behalf of the applicant-petitioner and also heard Learned Counsel, Mr. T. Debbarma appearing on behalf of the respondent- University. The present applicant has filed this writ petition seeking the following reliefs:

               i. Issue Rule upon the Respondents to show cause as to why a writ in the nature of Mandamus and/or order/orders, direction/directions of like nature shall not be issued whereby directing the Respondent Tripura University (TU) to regularize the service of the Petitioner to the Post of Assistant Professor with all consequential service benefits.

               ii. Issue Rule upon the Respondents to show cause as to why a writ in the nature of Mandamus and/or order/orders, direction/ directions of like nature shall not be issued whereby directing the Respondent TU to grant regular pay scale with arrears/outstanding salaries in favour of the Petitioner pertaining to the post of Assistant Professor, when the Petitioner has completed 10 years of service from the date of initial appointment, i.e., 04.01.2008.

               iii. Issue Rule upon the Respondents to show cause as to why a writ in the nature of Mandamus and/or order/orders, direction/ directions of like nature shall not be issued whereby directing the Respondent TU to give the benefit of minimum of the pay scale in favor of the Petitioner to the post of Assistant Professor from the date of initial appointment, i.e., 04.01.2008 till the date of regularization.

               iv. Issue Rule upon the Respondents to show cause as to why a writ in the nature of Mandamus and/or order/orders, direction/ directions of like nature shall not be issued whereby directing the Respondent TU to release the salary of the Petitioner w.e.f. 01.04.2026 to 24.04.2026.

               v. Issue Rule upon the Respondents to show cause as to why a writ in the nature of Mandamus and/or order/orders, direction/ directions of like nature shall not be issued whereby quashing and cancelling the impugned discontinuation letter, dated, 24.04.2026, issued by the Registrar (I/c), TU addressing to the Head, Department of Information Technology (IT) and communicated the same by the Head, Department of IT in favour of the Petitioner through e-mail whereby asking for discontinuing the service of the Petitioner as Assistant Professor (Contractual), in the Department of IT w.e.f. 24.04.2026, and in consequence thereto, directing the Respondent TU to reinstate the Petitioner with outstanding salaries for that period.

               vi. Call for the records pertaining to the instant Writ Petition from the custody of the Respondents.

               vii. Make the Rules absolute.

               And

               Pass any other order/orders as this Hon'ble High Court may consider fit and proper.

Along with the writ petition a separate application is filed for staying the impugned order of dismissal from service i.e. Annexure-49. For the sake of brevity, the relevant part of the communication dated 24.09.2026 (Annexure-49) is mentioned herein below:

               F.No.TU/REG/MISC/01/2026 Date: 24.04.2026

               To

               Prof. Swanirbhar Majumder

               Head, Department of Information Technology, Tripura University.

               Subject: Discontinuation of Duties of Sri Sumanta Saha (Assistant Professor- Contractual).

               Sir,

               With reference to the subject cited above, you are hereby directed not to allow Sri Sumanta Saha to continue his duties as Assistant Professor (Contractual) in your Department, as his contractual engagement has not been extended.

               You are further requested to communicate the same to Sri Saha accordingly.

               This is issued with the approval of the Competent Authority.

Now taking part in the hearing, Learned Senior Counsel for the applicant first of all drawn the attention of the Court the Annexure-1 i.e. the minutes of the meeting dated 14.09.2007 wherein it was decided to fill up the existing vacant posts of Lecturers (Contractual) for professional courses (BBA/BCA/MCA/MBA/M. Tech. in Electronic Engineering/M. Tech in Computer Science & Engineering).

Thereafter, in pursuance of the resolution one advertisement was issued on 17.09.2007 (Annexure-2) wherein University advertised to fill up six (6) posts of Lecturer for the School of IT and Computer Science. The applicant applied against the said post. After that he was called on for interview by a memo dated 16.11.2007 (Annexure-4). The applicant-petitioner participated in the process of interview and he got selected and by the proceeding of the first meeting of the Executive Council held on 17.12.2007 (Annexure-5) it was decided by the University Authority to appoint the applicant-petitioner as a Lecturer (Contractual) in professional course and accordingly, vide memo dated 03.01.2008 (Annexure-6) the applicant-petitioner was initially engaged as a Lecturer on contractual basis for a period of one year from the date of appointment. The applicant-petitioner joined to the said post of Lecturer (Contract basis) with consolidated pay and his joining was accepted by the University vide memo dated 22.01.2008 (Annexure-7). Thereafter, his period of contractual engagement as a lecturer continued time to time till 07.01.2026 by the respondent-University. The applicant-petitioner in this regard relied upon Annexures-8 to 29. In the meantime, Tripura University in the year 2024 invited application for filling up some of the posts including the post of Information Technology, UR (Annexure-30). The applicant-petitioner applied for the said post but his candidature was not accepted after screening (Annexure-33). After that the applicant-petitioner submitted representation on 13.02.2025 for considering his case for appointment to the post of Assistant Professor in the Department of IT (Annexure-34). Thereafter, he was again called for interview for direct recruitment to the post of Assistant Professor vide communication dated 27.02.2025 (Annexure-35). He participated in the process and was found to be provisionally eligible (Annexure-36), but finally, he was not selected. Prior to that he filed one writ petition before this High Court which was numbered as W.P.(C) 585/2023 for his absorption and High Court disposed of this matter with a direction to the respondent-University to consider his candidature considering the long period of his service. But that was turned down by the respondent-authority by letter dated 04.10.2024 (Annexure-45). In the meantime, again the applicant-petitioner approached to the High Court for releasing of his pay for the month of February and March which was also disposed of by this High Court on 30.03.2026 in I.A. 01 of 2026 arising out of W.P.(C) No.9 of 2025. But unfortunately, during this process by communication dated 24.04.2026 his service has been discontinued which compelled the applicant-petitioner to file this writ petition along with this I.A.

Learned Senior Counsel in support of the writ petition submitted that the respondent-University most illegally and arbitrarily discontinued the service of the applicant-petitioner after extracting his service for a period of almost 18 years found him eligible for the post of Lecturer (Contractual). So, at this stage, there is no scope on the part of the University to discontinue his service violating the principles of natural justice. So, Learned Counsel urged for admitting this writ petition and to issue notice upon the respondents and further prayed before this Court to pass an interim protection so that applicant-petitioner may be reinstated in service, if by this time he is released till disposal of the writ petition.

Learned Counsel, Mr. T. Debbarma appeared on behalf of the respondent-University and submitted that he needs to take some instructions and further submitted that since the applicant- petitioner was engaged as a Contractual Lecturer, so, he cannot claim for regularization. So, Learned Counsel submitted that there is no merit in the appeal filed by the applicant-petitioner and urged for dismissal of this I.A.

However, in course of hearing, being asked by the Court, Learned Counsel, Mr. Debbarma could not satisfy the Court as to why the respondent-University extracted his service since from the year 2008 to 2026 and also extended his contractual engagements year after years, if the applicant-petitioner was not at all eligible for the post of Lecturer (Contractual) for which he was engaged by due process. So, after a gap of 18 years it is very much shocking and surprising that the respondent-authority has taken decision to discontinue the service of the applicant- petitioner without offering him any scope to be absorbed or without offering him to be appointed which in the considered opinion of this Court the principles of natural justice has been violated by the respondent by discontinuing his service. So, after hearing both the sides, it appears to this Court that the action of the respondent by issuing communication dated 24.04.2026 is not only violates of the principles of natural justice rather it was arbitrary and prima facie illegal for which the same needs to be stayed.

So, till disposal of the writ petition, the respondent- authority shall be restrained from giving effect to the said communication dated 24.04.2026 (Annexure-14) and the respondent-authority shall re-engage the applicant-petitioner to the post which he occupied earlier, if, by this time he has been discontinued/discharged till disposal of this present writ petition.

In view of the above this present I.A. stands disposed of.

A copy of this order be communicated to Learned Senior Counsel for the applicant-petitioner in course of the day and also a copy of this order be supplied to Learned Counsel for the respondent-University for information and necessary action.