Punjab & Haryana High Court Orders Regularization of Contract Assistant Professors After 12 Years; Terms Long-Term Contractual Engagement “Exploitation”
Case Name: Nishi & Another v. Panjab University & Others
Date of Judgment: November 6, 2025
Citation: CWP-26899-2025
Bench: Hon’ble Mr. Justice Jagmohan Bansal
Held: The Punjab & Haryana High Court directed Panjab University to regularize two Assistant Professors who had been working continuously since 2012, holding that long-term continuation on contractual basis despite proper selection against sanctioned posts amounted to exploitation. Justice Jagmohan Bansal held that appointments made after advertisement, interviews, and merit assessment cannot be treated as “backdoor entries,” and that the University cannot rely on Uma Devi to deny regularization after engaging teachers for over a decade. The Court held that keeping qualified faculty on temporary contracts for 12 years violated Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution and was contrary to settled law on irregular vs. illegal appointments.
Summary: The petitioners were appointed as Assistant Professors (Commerce and Computer Science) in September 2012 pursuant to Advertisement No. 9/2012. Their posts were sanctioned regular posts, and they were selected through a valid recruitment process that included prescribed UGC qualifications and interviews. Despite this, Panjab University continued renewing their contracts every academic session for 12 years and issued Advertisement No. 1/2025 to fill the same posts through fresh recruitment.
The petitioners sought quashing of the advertisement and a direction for regularization. They relied on Jaggo v. Union of India (2024), M.L. Kesari (2010), Umadevi (2006), and Shripal (2025). The University argued that temporary employees had no right to regularization and cited Daya Lal (2011) and other judgments on contractual appointments.
Justice Bansal held that the petitioners were not temporary, part-time, or backdoor entrants, but regularly selected against sanctioned posts. The University’s conduct making contractual appointments after Uma Devi and continuing them indefinitely was criticized as contradictory and exploitative. The Court cited the Supreme Court’s recent decision in Jaggo, which held that long, uninterrupted service in sanctioned posts transforms irregular appointments into cases deserving regularization.
The Court also discussed systemic misuse of temporary contracts in public institutions, observing that exploitative practices such as indefinite contractual engagement, arbitrary termination risk, and denial of career progression violate fairness expected from a model employer.
Decision: The High Court allowed the writ petition and directed Panjab University to regularize both petitioners within six weeks, failing which they shall be deemed regularized automatically. They will then be entitled to seniority and regular pay from the expiry of the six-week period. The University may still fill other posts under the advertisement but must consider similarly placed long-serving contractual teachers for regularization in light of this judgment.