The Supreme Court on Wednesday took up over 120 petitions challenging the Calcutta High Court’s decision to nullify the appointments of 25,753 teachers and non-teaching staff in West Bengal government and aided schools. Petitioners argued that the verdict unfairly punished untainted candidates while addressing alleged irregularities in the 2016 recruitment process.

A bench comprising Chief Justice Sanjiv Khanna and Justice Sanjay Kumar acknowledged the concerns raised and emphasized the need to balance accountability for recruitment fraud with protecting the rights of innocent candidates.

Background of the Case

The appointments stemmed from the 2016 recruitment drive conducted by the West Bengal School Service Commission (SSC). Of the 23 lakh candidates who appeared for 24,640 advertised posts, 25,753 were eventually appointed, sparking allegations of widespread irregularities.

The Calcutta High Court’s April 2024 verdict cited evidence of tampered OMR sheets, rank manipulation, and other discrepancies. It invalidated all appointments, directing those appointed under dubious circumstances to return salaries and benefits with 12% annual interest.

The Supreme Court had stayed the high court’s order in May 2024, permitting the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) to continue its probe but barring coercive actions against appointees.

Petitioners’ Arguments

Senior advocates, including Dushyant Dave, Mukul Rohatgi, Kapil Sibal, and Menaka Guruswamy, argued on behalf of the petitioners.

• Dushyant Dave criticized the high court for escalating a limited inquiry into a sweeping CBI investigation, calling it disproportionate. “Innocent appointees should not lose their livelihoods due to administrative failures,” he contended.
• Mukul Rohatgi highlighted the absence of allegations against many appointees and questioned the high court’s reliance on incomplete forensic reports.
• Kapil Sibal and Menaka Guruswamy both argued that the cancellation unfairly penalized untainted candidates and failed to apply proportionality in its decision-making.

Advocates pointed out that many affected candidates had since crossed the age limit for competitive exams, making their disqualification particularly damaging.

Supreme Court’s Observations

The bench described the alleged recruitment scam as a “systemic fraud” but stressed the importance of distinguishing between tainted and untainted appointees. “If segregation is possible, invalidating the entire process may be unjustified,” the court observed.

The justices further noted that the state had a duty to maintain proper digital records of appointments, ensuring transparency and accountability.

The court will continue hearings on January 27, focusing on whether legitimate appointees can be safeguarded while addressing corruption. The case has significant implications for the affected candidates, administrative practices, and future recruitment processes.

Also read: Secondary schools of West Bengal record highest dropout rates