Arindam Sinha, J. - (1.) This writ petition came to be finally heard. Petitioner appeared in person to present his case of challenge to letter dated 21st August, 2003 and consequently, prayers for relief. It is necessary, text of this letter be reproduced below: "You were originally appointed by Vinod Gupta School of Management as Professor on contract basis for five years. The terms of the letter of appointment are contained in the letter dated 30th August, 1996, issued by Prof. Ashoke K. Dutta, the then Dean of the School. By an office order No. R/57/2001 dated 14th September, 2001 you were informed that the competent authority had agreed to extend the tenure of your appointment from 2nd September, 2001 to 1st September, 2006 on executing a fresh contract on a twenty rupees non-judicial stamp paper along with a signed copy thereof (draft contract form was enclosed). This office order was issued by Sri M.N. Gupta, Registrar. You did not execute the said contract on the basis of the draft sent to you, in spite of reminders. Yet you were allowed to continue as Professor and salary was released to you. On the 15th July, 2003 the present Registrar Dr. D. Gunasekaran sent a memo to the present Dean of VGSOM asking him to arrange to send the Contract Agreement duly signed by Dr. Subroto Roy, to the Registrar within fifteen days from the date of receipt of the memo, as this was required for the Institute records, processing salary bills etc. I sent the copy of the office order to you along with the draft contract requesting you to sign the contract agreement as required earlier, within fifteen days from the date of receipt of my letter. The said letter was sent under registered post with acknowledgement due and through courier. The acknowledgement has been received by us from you. However, you have still refused to sign the contract as stated. As you have failed and neglected to perform your part of the agreement wrongfully, the contract of appointment extending your time for five years is no longer binding on the Institute and the Institute terminates the contract. Accordingly, with effect from the afternoon of 20th August, 2003, you are relieved from your duties as Professor. VGSOM. You are hereby directed to hand over to the Assistant Registrar, VGSOM all items, assets, properties of the School and the Institute which are with you, and the vacant possession of the bungalow no. A-3 which had been allotted to you."
(2.) Petitioner drew attention of Court to his offer of appointment letter dated 30th August, 1996. He demonstrated therefrom, inter alia, duration of the appointment was for period of five years and termination of service could be by either side on three months notice. He also referred to endorsement in the letter which is extracted below: "Needless to say IIT has always had a strong tradition of academic freedom. Sd/-." According to him, this endorsement was assurance to him that he could, by way of academic freedom, pursue his research. He accepted the offer by his letter also dated 30th August, 1996. His specific submission, there was no formal agreement drawn up or executed at that time.
(3.) The five year period was due to expire on 1st September, 2001. Before that, on 30th November, 1999, then Director of Indian Institute of Technology, Kharagpur [IIT (KGP)] had remarked about him as follows: "Dean F & P I have read with interest and find the past experience to be impressive and interesting. I hope he will be able to make valuable contributions as a Professor of IIT Kgp also and I am looking forward to his future works." This resulted in automatic extension of his contract by another five years on same terms and conditions, was his submission. The Institute then issued office order dated 14th September, 2001, in supersession of its earlier order dated 31st August, 2001 informing that competent authority had kindly agreed to extend tenure of his appointment or further period of five years from 2nd September, 2001 to 1st September, 2006 on execution of fresh contract, draft enclosed. No fresh contract was executed as he continued in contractual service on same terms and conditions as on appointment.;