The Supreme Court has affirmed the right of associate professors at Tripura University to seek regularisation of their services in lien vacancies, marking a significant victory for the academic community. The ruling came after the university challenged a High Court directive that mandated the regularisation of the professors' services.
The Supreme Court bench, consisting of Justices M.R. Shah and B.V. Nagarathna, held that the professors occupying lien vacancies for an extended period had a legitimate expectation of regularisation. The court emphasised that long-term service in such positions cannot be dismissed without granting the employee the benefits of regularisation, a principle rooted in fairness and job security.
According to Live Law reports, the court's decision underscores the idea that employees working in lien vacancies—temporarily vacated by regular employees—should not be treated as mere stopgaps. Instead, when they serve for a substantial period, they should be recognized as deserving of permanent status. This ruling aligns with the broader legal principle that long-serving employees in temporary roles develop a legitimate expectation of regularisation, especially when their services have been continuous and integral to the institution.
This verdict is a crucial win for the associate professors of Tripura University, who have been engaged in a protracted battle for their rights. The case has brought to light the broader issue of job security in academic institutions, where temporary appointments often lead to prolonged uncertainty and exploitation of employees.
By upholding the High Court's order, the Supreme Court has set a precedent that will have far-reaching implications for similar cases across the country. The ruling is expected to provide relief not only to the professors at Tripura University but also to countless other employees in academia and other sectors who find themselves in precarious employment situations due to the nature of lien vacancies.
The court's intervention sends a clear message that institutions cannot bypass their obligations to employees who have devoted years of service, regardless of the temporary nature of their initial appointments. It reinforces the need for institutions to ensure that employees are granted the security and benefits they deserve, thereby preventing exploitation and fostering a more equitable work environment.
As the ruling details are further disseminated, this case will likely prompt other educational institutions and employers to reevaluate their policies regarding temporary and lien positions, ensuring that those who contribute significantly over time are recognized and fairly treated.
