Today, On 3rd June, A plea has been filed in the Calcutta High Court challenging the West Bengal School Service Commission’s fresh teacher recruitment notification. The petition raises concerns over the process and legality of filling vacant teaching posts in state schools.
The notification issued by the West Bengal School Service Commission (WBSSC) to fill vacant teaching positions in state-run schools has been contested in the Calcutta High Court.
The single-judge vacation bench led by Justice Raja Basu Chowdhury accepted the petition, which is set for a hearing on June 5.
The Calcutta High Court granted permission on Tuesday for petitions to be filed against the rules and notification concerning the recruitment of over 44,000 teaching and non-teaching positions in West Bengal government-run and aided schools by the School Service Commission (SSC).
The petitioners, who identify as candidates, argued before the vacation court that the rules and notification do not align with the directives of the Supreme Court.
The petitioner argues that specific aspects of the notification, particularly the revised weightage criteria in the total marks distribution for the recruitment process, contradict the Supreme Court’s directives regarding new recruitments.
The primary concern is that the weightage criteria have altered from those established in 2016.
According to the recent notification released last week, the written examination in the current recruitment process will account for 60 marks, compared to 55 marks for the 2016 panel.
Additionally, the weightage for educational qualifications has been reduced to just 10 marks, down from 35 marks in the 2016 panel. Notably, two new weightage criteria have been introduced “past teaching experience” and “lecture demonstration,” each worth 10 marks.
Following the issuance of the notification, several legal experts expressed concerns about potential legal challenges due to these changes in weightage criteria. They noted that while the new criteria might benefit teachers from the 2016 panel who lost their jobs, they could disadvantage fresh candidates.
Legal analysts argued that altering the weightage criteria was fundamentally illegal, insisting that the same criteria used for the 2016 panel should apply to the new recruitment process.
Their concerns have now materialized with the filing of a petition challenging the notification in the Calcutta High Court, directly addressing the highlighted issues.
The Supreme Court’s division bench, On April 3, which included the former Chief Justice of India Sanjiv Khanna and Justice Sanjay Kumar, upheld a previous ruling by the Calcutta High Court’s division bench that cancelled 25,753 school appointments in West Bengal.
The Apex Court also supported the Calcutta High Court’s observation that the entire panel of 25,753 candidates needed to be cancelled due to the state government’s and the commission’s failure to distinguish between “untainted” and “tainted” candidates.
The state government and WBSSC have since filed review petitions with the Apex Court regarding this matter.