'Deliberate Illegal Action': Calcutta High Court Raps WBSSC, Cancels Appointment Of 6 Teachers In Recruitment Scam

The Calcutta High Court on Monday ordered the cancellation of appointment of six assistant teachers in the Murshidabad district after noting that they had been illegally appointed pursuant to the illegal recommendation of the West Bengal School Service Commission (WBSSC). 

The Court was adjudicating upon a plea alleging illegal appointments pertaining to the West Bengal State Level Selection Test (SLST) for Class 9 and Class 10 mathematics teachers.

Justice Abhijit Gangopadhyay observed that the illegally recruited candidates do not have any 'legal right' to o work as assistant teachers in the schools pursuant to the letter written by the District Inspector of Schools (S.E.), Murshidabad dated February 8, 2021 to the President of West Bengal Board of Secondary Education.

The Court further opined that the illegally recruited teachers should not be paid any salary henceforth and further directed that the salaries already paid to them must be recovered by the District Inspector of Schools (SE), Murshidabad.

"The above named persons shall not be allowed to work in the above named schools as assistant teachers any further and they shall not get any salary from the State exchequer. The salaries they have received till date shall be refunded to the Government immediately. If they fail to refund the received salary against such illegal appointments, the District Inspector of Schools (SE), Murshidabad shall have every liberty to initiate steps against them both under civil and criminal laws to realise the salary received by them", the Court directed. 

Justice Abhijit Gangopadhyay ordered the cancellation of the appointments of six teachers from Panchagram ISA High School, Nazirpur SR High School, Dharmadanga High School, Laskarpur High School, Kazipara Haridas Vidyalaya, and Dighri High School.

The Court was adjudicating upon a plea moved by one Md. Abdul Gani Ansari apprised the Court that he had obtained a total marks of 66.67. However, he had not been called for counselling or issued any recommendation and appointment letter despite the fact that candidates who got lower marks than him were offered jobs. He submitted that candidates having lower marks had been given the opportunity to appear for counselling and had subsequently received appointment letters and had also joined different schools where they are presently working as Assistant teachers. 

The Court pursuant to the perusal of the affidavit filed by the WBSCC observed that the allegation of the writ petitioner is wholly correct. The WBSCC had submitted in its affidavit that the petitioner was not coming in the zone of consideration as he obtained lesser marks than the last candidate recommended by the Commission for the same category.

Dismissing such a contention, the Court observed with dismay, 

"This court fails to understand if the petitioner was not coming in the zone of consideration as he obtained lesser marks than the last candidate recommended how the candidates obtaining marks lesser than the petitioner, as has been disclosed by the Commission itself in their said affidavit, could be recommended in different schools. This shows that those candidates also did not come within the zone of consideration but they were given recommendations and appointments."

Furthermore, the Court noted that the WBSCC had stated that the illegally recruited candidates had been recommended by the Commission due to a 'mistake'. Opining that this was a 'deliberate illegal action' on the part of the Commission and not a mistake, the Court further remarked, 

"Though the School Service Commission has taken shelter under the expression 'mistake', this court wholly disbelieves such shroud of the Commission now placed on its face. This cannot be a mistake. These are deliberate illegal action otherwise the wait-listed candidates in serial nos. 229, 242, 250, 265, 289 and 302 could not have been recommended selectively by the Commission."

The Court noted that an appropriate order in this regard would be passed at a later stage. In the meantimes, the District Inspector of Schools (SE), Murshidabad was directed to file a report in the form of an affidavit on February 28  disclosing when the vacancies of the aforementioned schools were reported to him/his office and when those vacancies were sent to the next higher authority by the District Inspector of Schools and to the West Bengal Central School Service Commission.

"The particulars in the said report in the form of an affidavit as directed above is to be disclosed with memo numbers and dates and should be taken from the records of the District Inspector of Schools", the Court directed further. 

The matter is slated to be heard next on February 28. 

Case Title: Md. Abdul Gani Ansari v. State of West Bengal & Ors.

Case Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Cal) 52

Click Here To Read/Download Order