India, July 18 -- An analysis of the petitions filed by teachers of higher educational institutions (HEIs) of Chandigarh and Punjab in tribunals and courts shows that at every stage of their careers they have to knock at the doors of the judiciary for the redressal of their grievances related to service matters. Looking at these cases, it is also obvious that this arduous route is pursued by a few, while many suffer in quiet agony as litigation is time-consuming, complex, and expensive, and additionally, may result in harassment and victimisation. In this context, the April 2025 directive for the efficient and effective management of litigation by the Government of India, extensively covered in the columns of HT last week, that aims to reduce unnecessary litigation and promote responsible governance, ensuring public welfare and timely dispensation of justice, should act as a guiding light to the authorities. The directive seeks to identify and address systemic issues, such as closing the gaps in the legislative framework or correcting any infirmities in executive action. Teachers feel that in their case litigation often emerges because mandatory regulation framed by the apex statutory bodies like the UGC/AICTE, that are in the nature of subordinate legislation passed by Parliament, are often ignored by the authorities, and decisions that should be in the domain of the executive are left to the courts to adjudicate upon. Initially, most teachers in various HEIs are appointed on an ad-hoc or temporary basis, with most not even being given an appointment letter, lest they seek legitimate relief later. They are relieved before vacations and re-engaged afterward to deny them vacation salary. Most endure painful working conditions, with the hope that they are recalled after the vacation. To those who have sought judicial intervention, the courts have granted continuity and service benefits. In response, the authorities have devised a system of contractual appointments across HEIs, which comes with still more exploitative terms, such as fixed tenures, crushing workloads, meagre salaries, denial of vacation and maternity benefits, and even undertakings not to approach courts. In multiple cases filed since 2011, and decided on August 31, 2024, the Punjab and Haryana high court, upholding the decision of the Central Administrative Tribunal, Chandigarh bench, observed that such contractual teachers of government colleges of Chandigarh are entitled to continue in service until the posts are filled on a regular basis and cannot be replaced by other contractual appointees. The court gave them the benefit of salary equivalent to regular teachers with applicable dearness allowance, vacation salary, maternity leave, and other service benefits. The administration, instead of giving the teachers these benefits, challenged the judgment before the Supreme Court that dismissed it on July 16. Now the administration faces contempt proceedings in the high court. The courts have to be approached to compel the authorities to advertise regular posts lying vacant in colleges and universities for years together. In 2014, a public interest litigation in the high court forced the Punjab government to advertise 1,925 posts of teaching faculty which were lying vacant in government-aided colleges in the state by lifting the ban imposed in 2005. The state was directed to carry out a cadre review of required staff, which it had not taken up after 1980, but little has been done so far. The appointees continue to face systemic injustice in regularisation, grant of annual increments, and other allowances. The case of the teachers in the government colleges is as bad. The appointment of 1,158 assistant professors and librarians by Punjab in 2021 were quashed by the apex court on July 14, holding the process of selection to be "narrow, political, and clearly arbitrary". The last selection to teaching posts in Punjab was only made in 2002, and that too got into trouble due to allegations of corruption which led to a protracted litigation. Another recruitment was attempted in 2008 for 265 posts which was again stuck in litigation for many years. The case of teachers in the UT of Chandigarh is much the same as vacancies in colleges and Panjab University have remained unfilled for years. Teachers who manage to get regular jobs face challenges ranging from impediments in career progression and award of incentives for PhD/ MPhil and other higher qualifications; and, even in the grant of allowances and annual increments, and resultant pay fixations; to implementation of revised pay-scales; counting of past service, period of probation and confirmation, that subsequently affects their seniority. These are common issues that lead to prolonged litigation because of lax executive action. At the end of their careers, teachers once again flock to courts, seeking statutory superannuation benefits like pension, provident fund, gratuity and leave encashment. In March 2025, the high court ruled that colleges receiving grant-in-aid can seek reimbursement from the government for terminal benefits like gratuity and leave encashment paid to teachers. The court clarified that colleges are obligated to pay these benefits upfront, and then claim reimbursement through the grant-in-aid mechanism. But many colleges continue to deny teachers their statutory dues, forcing them to approach courts. In March/April 2025, the Supreme Court castigated the Punjab government for failing to implement the Privately Managed Affiliated and Punjab Government Aided Colleges Pensionary Benefits Scheme, 1996, despite repeated assurances. The court summoned the state chief secretary for non-compliance and accused the state of taking it "for a ride". It announced its intention to directly award exemplary monetary compensation to the teachers, if the state continued to ignore its obligations. Another significant set of court cases pertains to the age of superannuation of teachers in Panjab University and its affiliated government colleges and privately managed government-aided colleges of Chandigarh. The teachers maintain that their age of superannuation has been raised to 65 years as per the UGC regulation in 2010, but the claim is contested by the authorities. In many cases in the courts since 2014, university teachers have got extension in service till 65 years, government college petitioners who had not turned 65 were recalled to join service, and teachers of privately managed government-aided colleges are pressing for extension as was earlier given to them along with university teachers. It is disconcerting that the higher education sector remains one area where hundreds of court cases arise with such alarming frequency. It is hoped that the authorities in Punjab and Chandigarh would pay heed to the directive of the central government and take firm steps to minimise litigation in the interest of good governance, and behave like "model employers". And thereby, dispel the growing impression that perhaps, no other category of employees faces such gross injustice as do the teachers....