On April 22, a division bench of the Calcutta High Court annulled the appointments of over 23,000 teachers and non-teaching staff at the secondary and higher secondary levels, following a CBI investigation that uncovered alleged illegalities in the 2016 state-level selection test. In early May, the Supreme Court imposed an interim stay on the termination order and is scheduled to hear the case on Thursday.
NEW DELHI: The Supreme Court on Thursday, December 19, heard multiple petitions challenging the Calcutta High Court’s decision regarding the alleged teacher recruitment scam in West Bengal.
The case was heard by a bench led by Chief Justice of India (CJI) Justice Sanjiv Khanna. Senior advocate Rakesh Dwivedi represented the state of West Bengal, arguing that the state government was cooperating with the investigation and supported the separation of tainted and clean candidates as noted in the High Court’s directives.
CJI Khanna asked Dwivedi to refer to the impugned judgment and explain why the High Court deemed the separation of candidates unfeasible. Addressing a misconception about Section 65B of the Indian Evidence Act, the CJI clarified that it pertains only to certification and not the evidentiary value of documents. He noted that while original OMR sheets were not recovered, the certificate merely confirmed data downloaded from the server, leaving the authenticity of the hard disk data unresolved.
Highlighting irregularities in the case, CJI Khanna asked whether all OMR sheet details were retrieved from the server or if some were missing. He emphasized that separating tainted candidates from clean ones seemed impossible and pointed out that additional posts were created despite the irregularities. Questioning the state’s actions, he asked whether illegal appointments had been deliberately allowed to continue.
“To this, the Chief Justice of India (CJI) said, ‘Please refer to the impugned judgment and tell us why the High Court concluded that separation is not possible. A misconception persists about Section 65B of the Indian Evidence Act. It is not related to the evidentiary value of the document and is only a certificate. I agree that the original copies of the OMR sheets were not recovered. The certificate only shows what has been downloaded from the server, which is in the hard disk, but the authenticity of the data on the hard disk is not something that Section 65B provides.’
“The Chief Justice further questioned senior advocate Jaideep Gupta of the Bengal Staff Selection Commission, asking,
‘Why did you not keep the data with you while giving it to the other party? How did it happen simultaneously despite there being hardly any time gap between marking and scanning? There has definitely been some manipulation from your side, and we have to see whether there has been any manipulation from Pankaj Bhansal’s side as well.’
The Supreme Court also noted, ‘The CBI report indicates that something is wrong, but they have not ascertained the authenticity.’ Meanwhile, senior advocate Sanjay Hegde, representing the Bengal Board, argued, ‘I have appeared on behalf of the board. The court should consider whether things can be separated or whether everything should be removed together. We have come here for continuous education in West Bengal.'”
“Responding to the arguments, the Supreme Court stated,
‘We cannot ignore everything to provide education. We are looking at whether there can be any mistake in the High Court’s decision or whether separation is feasible.’
CJI Khanna remarked, “I Don’t Know Whether Daal Mein Kaala Hai Yaan Sab Kuch Hi Kaala hai!”
Chief Justice of India (CJI) remarked that Thursdays would henceforth be regular working days for the Court. A circular will be issued to formalize this, and it will include a brief note on the matters listed for the day.
The High Court invalidated the appointments, deeming them illegal, and directed the CBI to investigate the recruitment scam.
Previously, the Supreme Court remarked that it would explore the possibility of segregating the untainted appointments rather than canceling the entire recruitment process.
READ ALSO: Calcutta High Court Addresses CBI Judge’s Role in West Bengal Recruitment Scandal
Background
On April 22, a division bench of the Calcutta High Court annulled the appointments of over 23,000 teachers and non-teaching staff at the secondary and higher secondary levels, following a CBI investigation that uncovered alleged illegalities in the 2016 state-level selection test. In early May, the Supreme Court imposed an interim stay on the termination order and is scheduled to hear the case on Thursday.
The Supreme Court will review a state government petition arguing that the high court’s ruling would create a “huge vacuum” in state schools and bring the education system to a “standstill.”
Siddhartha Majumdar, chairman of the school service commission, stated that the apex court is expected to hear the case in the first half of the day.
A state education department official explained that the state government has not been able to conduct any recruitment tests for secondary and higher secondary levels in the past eight years. The termination of such a large number of teachers and non-teaching staff would create a significant void in government schools.
“Our primary argument is that the high court, instead of segregating the valid appointments from the allegedly illegal ones, mistakenly annulled the entire selection process,”
the official said.
On April 22, the Calcutta High Court bench, led by Justice Debanshu Basak, canceled the appointments of over 23,000 teachers and non-teaching staff at government-aided schools, stating that it was impossible to separate the illegal appointments from the legal ones.
The chairperson of the commission had informed reporters on the same day that they had reported complaints of irregularities regarding the recruitment of 5,000 teaching and non-teaching staff, based on information provided by the CBI.
The Supreme Court had previously expressed its disapproval of a blanket cancellation of the appointments, preferring instead to segregate those who were illegally appointed from those who were genuinely selected.
On Thursday, the Supreme Court is expected to hear arguments from all parties involved in the case, including the Bengal government, West Bengal School Service Commission, the original petitioners before the high court who were not selected for appointment, those whose appointments were canceled by the high court, and the CBI.
