In June 1995, Cambridge University's Institute of Astronomy (IoA) celebrated the 80th birthday of its founder, the renowned physicist Fred Hoyle. Members of the original team who helped establish one of the world's leading scientific institutions in 1972 were invited.

Among them was Jayant Vishnu Narlikar, one of the founding faculty of IoA, and one of Hoyle's old research students. Narlikar was then founding director of Inter-University Centre for Astronomy and Astrophysics (IUCAA) in Pune, a place modelled closed after IoA. At the summer garden party on one of those rare English sunny afternoons, Hoyle, the most important figure in Britain's post-WW2 astronomy and space sciences establishment, was asked to speak about his life in science.

In a letter to Robert Hooke in 1675, another Cambridge scientist, Isaac Newton, had famously said, 'If I have seen further, it is by standing on the shoulders of giants.' Hoyle started his speech about his main contributions to astronomy by saying, 'If I have seen further than others, it is by standing on the shoulders of a Jayant.'

In the 1960s, Narlikar, with his mentor Hoyle, developed a work that's arguably the finest among their scientific oeuvres. Hoyle-Narlikar theory of gravity presented an alternative to Einstein's general relativity by fundamentally incorporating Mach's Principle.

Think of it this way: what if the weight and mass (inertia) of an object isn't just something it has by itself, but is actually influenced by everything else in the universe? Unlike Einstein's theory of relativity, which sees gravity as a warping of space and time, Hoyle and Narlikar proposed that gravity is a direct interaction between all particles in the universe, near and far.

Their theory also included a unique concept called the 'creation field', which meant new matter constantly appearing to keep the universe expanding without becoming empty. This was consistent with their model of the universe-steady state theory-which believes the universe to be infinite in age and expanse. While we now have strong evidence for the Big Bang model-which believes the universe began from a point almost 14 bn years ago-this theory was a bold and thought-provoking alternative that pushed scientists to think differently about how our universe works.

Celebrity came early to Jayant Narlikar. He was a decorated student, a senior wrangler in Cambridge mathematics with lots of prizes under his belt. With his work on cosmology with Hoyle being discussed in the halls of science across the world, the Indian government laid out a red carpet for him to return to India and set up a strong group in physics and astronomy research at Tata Institute of Fundamental Research (TIFR), from which would hopefully spawn many others.

In 1988, UGC created for him his own institution, IUCAA, in Pune, to help build astronomy and cosmology teaching and research in all the universities across India. At 27, he had been awarded the Padma Bhushan, which later became a Padma Vibhashan as he stepped off his 3-term stint as director of IUCAA.

Narlikar's approach to the nature of gravity, even at an early stage of his career, showed that at heart, he was a maverick. As most cosmologists grew comfortable accepting the Big Bang model, Narlikar held his ground that the steady state had to be the answer. As more evidence was unearthed in favour of Big Bang, he responded with alternative explanations. With Geoff Burbidge and others, he proposed the quasi-steady state model, a universe that contracts and expands, cycling endlessly, with no beginning.

The cosmic microwave background, which is the strongest evidence in support of the Big Bang, was elegantly explained with a kind of interstellar dust. Models of dust led to more problems. But Narlikar was undeterred. He refused to stop thinking, or reimagining. He was not a contrarian, but somebody who believed that it's essential to have voices who question mainstream dogma.

As IUCAA director, I cherished Narlikar's daily presence at the institute in his office next to the library, where I would regularly go for discussions and advice. In the entire time I worked with him, I found his allegiance to his theories never to be dogmatic. In front of students and other academics, he would be open to all-out debate about anything he did or did not believe in. He would argue with impeccable rigour, ever smiling.

The fact that I often contradicted him in academic debates was never held personally against me, or anybody else. Narlikar was a professional academic in every sense of the term.

I got interested in astronomy as a child from his books, and Carl Sagan, whose TV series, 'Cosmos,' he brought to Doordarshan audiences. Later on, as I worked alongside him to bring science to the public, especially to young people, I saw the true Jayant Narlikar-the maverick who was not afraid to question the core dogmas of science, as well as all-pervasive pseudo-science in society, embodied in astrology and general superstition.

Narlikar was truly a giant, not just of astrophysics or academia, but of rational thought and expression, and spent a lifetime very effectively communicating this to the rest of the world. There won't be another of his kind. Adieu.