The Punjab and Haryana high court (HC) has upheld a single judge order that mandated Panjab University (PU) to regularise the services of contract teachers serving in the varsity and its constituent colleges for more than 10 years.
The HC bench of justice HS Sethi and justice Minderjeet Yadav was hearing an appeal from PU against the single judge order passed in November 2025 in some teachers’ cases.
The court modified the single bench order to the extent that the university will consider the claim of all such teachers and regularise them if there is nothing against their work and conduct. Lawyers said the order would immediately benefit at least 40 such faculty members on campus and in colleges.
PU’s stance in court
The PU, in its appeal, had argued that when the recruitment was made, the selection committee constituted was not in accordance with the recommendations of the University Grants Commission (UGC). Therefore, even if the teachers fulfill the requisite academic qualifications, their services cannot be regularised. It stated that it has decided to advertise these posts and these teachers can compete in the recruitment.
The court found that the posts against which these teachers were appointed were duly advertised and all eligible candidates were invited to compete, although, posts were filled on temporary basis. These appointments were for particular academic sessions and with the condition that their services will stand terminated in case the regular incumbents join before the completion of the tenure for which they were appointed.
{{/usCountry}}The court found that the posts against which these teachers were appointed were duly advertised and all eligible candidates were invited to compete, although, posts were filled on temporary basis. These appointments were for particular academic sessions and with the condition that their services will stand terminated in case the regular incumbents join before the completion of the tenure for which they were appointed.
{{/usCountry}}It also came across the bench that some teachers have been working for more than a decade even as their recruitment was a “stopgap arrangement”.
“The long tenure shows that not only was the service of the respondents needed, their conduct demonstrated that they were effectively discharging the duties attached to the said posts. Hence, (PU’s) argument that the temporary appointment, stopgap arrangement had been directed to be regularised (by the single judge bench), cannot be accepted,” it recorded.
The court found that except regular employment, all other benefits are already being given to these teachers.
While giving three months’ time to PU to pass a speaking order, the court said that if any teacher does not fulfil the requisite of 10 years – experience up to today but are about to fulfill in the near future – such teachers are not to be treated as ineligible. The court gave PU the liberty to look into the record of each teacher before complying with the directions and in case there is any grave misconduct on part of any teacher, the varsity can pass an order against regularisation after giving due reasons for such decision.