Gauhati High Court bars further extensions for contractual assistant professors in Nagaland government colleges, citing constitutional and UGC violations
DIMAPUR — The Kohima Bench of Gauhati High Court has held that the contractual appointment of assistant professors in Nagaland’s government colleges, and their repeated annual extensions, violate Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution and Regulation 13 of the UGC Regulations, 2010 and 2018.
The Division Bench of Justice Devashis Baruah and Justice Helen Daungliani has also directed that no further extension be granted to the contractual services of the assistant professors covered by the batch of appeals.
The court pronounced the judgement last week while disposing of a batch of writ appeals challenging the appointment of assistant professors on contractual terms without advertisement, as well as their subsequent extensions.
The bench also set aside the November 12, 2025 judgements of the Single Judge, which had dismissed the writ petitions on the ground of locus standi without examining the substantive issues raised.
The appeals related to contractual assistant professors appointed in various government colleges. The petitioners had argued that the appointments were made without a proper selection process and that repeated extensions denied other qualified candidates an equal opportunity to compete for government posts.
Read: Gauhati HC Kohima Bench launches 3 digital initiatives
The judgement noted that Nagaland had 15 government colleges with 636 assistant professors as of March 1, 2024. Of these, 491 were regular appointees and 145 were fixed-pay contractual teachers. Some of the contractual teachers, the court noted, had been serving for nine to 16 years through successive extensions.
The state had argued that no sanctioned assistant professor posts had been created since 2017 and that contractual appointments were necessary to meet shortages in various subjects and maintain the prescribed student-teacher ratio. It also maintained that the UGC regulations allowed contractual appointments in cases of urgent need.
The court observed that the absence of sanctioned posts could not be used to justify what it termed “backdoor appointments” that were then continued for years. Every qualified candidate, it stated, has a right under Articles 14 and 16 to be considered for appointment to a post under the state.
The bench also examined Regulation 13.1 of the UGC Regulations, which permits contractual appointments where necessary to maintain the prescribed student-teacher ratio, subject to certain conditions.
One of those conditions is that contractual appointments should not exceed 10% of the total faculty strength. In Nagaland, however, 145 of the 636 assistant professors were contractual appointees — about 23%.
The court further noted that contractual teachers are required to have the same qualifications and undergo the same selection procedure as regular teachers. It found that these requirements had not been followed in the cases before it.
The bench also pointed out that the fixed emoluments paid to the contractual assistant professors were less than one-third of the gross salary of a regular assistant professor. Despite this, their appointments were being extended year after year rather than being made in accordance with the prescribed academic-session framework.
“From the above, it would be seen that the respondent state in order to fulfil one component of student-teacher ratio have violated the other four conditions,” the bench observed.
The court warned that failure to comply with the UGC regulations could have wider implications for the colleges, including withholding of grants and action affecting their affiliation with Nagaland University. It stressed that the prescribed teacher-student ratio was not intended merely as a numerical requirement, but also to ensure the quality of higher education.
While acknowledging that creation of posts falls within the executive’s domain, the bench directed the state to take effective steps to create adequate posts in the 15 government colleges, keeping in view the requirements under the UGC regulations.
The court, however, stopped short of cancelling contractual extensions that had already been granted recently, observing that such a move could create a chaotic situation in the colleges and affect the teacher-student ratio.
It directed that no further extension be granted to the contractual services of the private respondents covered by the appeals. The state government was also directed to take strict action against the head of any department whose authority grants an extension in violation of the court’s directions.
The bench further directed that regular vacancies for assistant professors be requisitioned through the Nagaland Public Service Commission (NPSC).
If the state is unable to create all the required posts due to financial constraints and opts to make contractual appointments, the court stated that such appointments must strictly comply with Regulation 13.1 of the UGC Regulations, 2018 and be preceded by due advertisement.
The litigation over contractual appointments has a longer history. The judgement records that challenges to such appointments in Nagaland have been before the courts since 2015, including proceedings concerning 706 posts across 32 departments and subsequent litigation involving 208 assistant professors.