The Supreme Court on Tuesday stayed the Calcutta High Court’s April 22 order invalidating the appointments of 25,753 teachers and non-teaching staff in state-run and state-aided schools of West Bengal. A bench comprising Chief Justice DY Chandrachud and Justices JB Pardiwala and Manoj Misra said since the tainted appointment can be segregated, it would be unwise to set aside the appointments in entirety.
The apex court, however, directed that the salaries of the illegal appointees would have to be refunded. It also allowed the CBI to continue the investigation into the case as per directions of the High Court order. However, the court told the probe agency that no precipitation action could be taken against the accused.
“We are of the view that an expeditious disposal of the matter will be in the interest of Justice, we continue the ad interim protection given, subject to the express stipulation that any person found to have been appointed illegally and continued as a consequence of the present order shall refund the salary ….this would cover the 4 categories of individuals,” it said.
Passing the order, the court referred to CBI’s report dated 5 February 2024 and said that the probe agency found manipulation on the account OMR sheets.
“Apart from the above report of CBI, the impugned judgement of the High Court contained in para 240 that the SSC report tabulated the alleged irregularities,” it added.
The court said that figures submitted by the SSC indicate that the number of appointments exceeded that told by the assessee.
The court noted that the West Bengal government had also accepted that there were widespread illegalities in the selection process.
Noting the contentions of appellants, the order said that cancellation of the entirety of the select list should be a matter of last recourse and where a segregation of the tainted candidates is possible only such names should be cancelled, and the petitions were filed 3 years after appointments were made for employees serving the State.
“That it is manifestly unjust for the HC to set aside the entire process when identification of tainted candidates is possible,” the court said.
“We are of the view that submissions canvassed by the petitioners merit further consideration. The certificate under S 65B of the Evidence Act was issued by Pankaj Bansal, who is a former employee of NYSA communications. The legitimacy of the certificate obtained from the above individual would prima facie lie at the root of the data that forms the basis of the HC judgment to set aside the entirety of the appointments,” the court added.
The court further said that apart, based on material, it would appear that the appointments so tainted can be segregated, so it would be unwise to set aside the appointments in entirety. “The court cannot be unmindful of the teachers appointed in large numbers and the consequence of upholding the impugned judgment. The modalities would then need to be developed for the same,” it said.
“On 19 May 2022 the govt of WB in the school education department issued an order creating 6861 supernumerary posts for absorbing staff from waitlisted candidates and directed an appointment letter to such candidates should be issued in terms of the SSC subject to the outcome in the HC case,” it said.
Earlier, terming the alleged recruitment scam in West Bengal “systemic fraud”, the Supreme Court said authorities were duty-bound to maintain the digitised records pertaining to the appointment of 25,753 teachers and non-teaching staff.
“The public job is so scarce… Nothing remains if the faith of the public goes. This is systemic fraud. Public jobs are extremely scarce today and are looked at for social mobility. What remains in the system if their appointments are also maligned? People will lose faith, how do you countenance this?” the CJI asked the lawyers representing the state government.
The bench said the state government has nothing to show that the data was maintained by its authorities and asked about its availability.
“Either you have the data or you do not have it…. You were duty-bound to maintain the documents in digitised form. Now, it is obvious that there is no data. You are unaware of the fact that your service provider has engaged another agency. You had to maintain supervisory control,” the bench told the state government’s lawyers.
The court is likely to schedule the matter for further hearing in July.
Earlier, the state government had challenged the Calcutta High Court order, saying it cancelled the appointments “arbitrarily”.
(With PTI Inputs)
Stay updated with live coverage of Lok Sabha Election 2024 Phase 3 Voting In Karnataka And Gujarat on our website. Get the latest updates, polling trends, result dates and more.
Comments
0 comment