The Supreme Court questioned West Bengal’s decision to create supernumerary posts rather than dismissing staff allegedly appointed irregularly. It highlighted discrepancies in a committee’s report and emphasized accountability in recruitment processes, particularly regarding 25,753 affected teachers. The court allowed CBI investigations to continue while awaiting further hearings in January 2025, insisting on actions against illegal appointments.
New Delhi: The Supreme Court on Thursday questioned the West Bengal government on its decision to create supernumerary posts of teachers and non-teaching staff instead of removing individuals allegedly appointed through irregular means.
“Why did you create supernumerary posts? What was the purpose of creating that?”
a bench comprising Chief Justice Sanjiv Khanna and Justice Sanjay Kumar asked the state’s counsel.
Senior Advocate Rakesh Dwivedi, representing West Bengal, referred to a committee report that investigated the irregularities in the selection process. The bench acknowledged the report but pointed out discrepancies, observing that some irregularities were indeed uncovered.
Dwivedi argued that the irregularities identified by the committee were less extensive compared to those noted in the CBI report. However, the bench remained unconvinced, stating,
“If you find the irregularity committed, will you not throw them out first?”
The issue pertains to a batch of petitions challenging the Calcutta High Court’s April 22 ruling that invalidated the appointments of 25,753 teachers and non-teaching staff in state-run and state-aided schools.
On May 7, the Supreme Court stayed the High Court’s order canceling the appointments but allowed the CBI to continue its investigation. The High Court had ordered the cancellation after finding irregularities in recruitments made by the School Service Commission (SSC).
The controversy stems from a May 19, 2022, directive by the West Bengal government, which created 6,861 supernumerary posts to absorb wait-listed candidates. The court remarked,
“The reason is this, that you don’t want to throw out the tainted candidates.”
The bench further questioned whether the state supported the segregation of “tainted” individuals from those legitimately appointed. Dwivedi assured the court that West Bengal backed segregation but criticized the High Court’s “blanket direction” for a CBI probe, including custodial interrogations.
The court expressed concern over the unavailability of original OMR (Optical Mark Recognition) sheets, which are the primary evidence in the selection process.
“The original paper is the OMR sheet. If any manipulation is done on the main evidence, it will only be visible in the OMR sheets,”
the bench noted.
The court also questioned the CBI about its ability to ascertain the date when OMR data was captured. It observed that
“people who are not even recommended and who have not qualified… they were issued letters,”
labeling it a serious matter.
The Supreme Court emphasized that individuals whose appointments are found illegal must refund their salaries and emoluments. It also highlighted that 23 lakh candidates appeared for the state-level selection test in 2016 for 24,640 vacancies, but 25,753 appointment letters were issued.
The matter is set for further hearing in January 2025, with submissions from prominent advocates Kapil Sibal, Abhishek Manu Singhvi, and others continuing. The apex court’s scrutiny signals a push for accountability in the recruitment process.
FOLLOW US FOR MORE LEGAL UPDATES ON YOUTUBE
