Primary recruitment: jobs scrapped after 9 years to cause insurmountable inconvenience, says Cal HC

Kolkata, Dec 3 (PTI) Setting aside a single bench order cancelling the appointment of 32,000 primary school teachers in West Bengal, a division bench of the Calcutta High Court on Wednesday said jobs terminated after nine years of service would doubtless cause "insurmountable inconvenience" to the appellants.

The court, referring to petitioners who challenged the 2016 state primary education board recruitments, also said that a group of unsuccessful candidates should not be allowed to damage the entire system and that the possibility of innocent teachers suffering great ignominy and stigma cannot be ruled out.

"A job taken away after about nine years of service would indisputably cause insurmountable inconvenience to the appellants and their survival along with their family members would be at stake," a division bench presided by Justice Tapabrata Chakraborty observed.

"In such circumstances and considering the enormity of the impact, we are not inclined to uphold the cancellation of appointment of the 32,000 teachers, who have worked in the post for a long period," the division bench held.

The services of appointees cannot also be terminated only on the basis of an ongoing criminal proceeding, the bench said with regard to the ongoing investigations into the alleged recruitment irregularities in the Teacher Eligibility Test (TET) conducted in 2014.

"Findings arrived at by the investigating authorities would not reveal that the appointed candidates were involved in any corrupt practices," the bench, also comprising Justice Reetobroto Kumar Mitra, said.

The court said that upon investigation, it was ascertained by CBI that irregularities exist in respect of 264 candidates who were given grace marks and identified.

It said that the agency additionally identified 96 candidates who failed to secure qualifying marks but were nonetheless appointed.

The appointments of these candidates were subsequently terminated but they continue to remain in service on the strength of an order passed by the Supreme Court.

"In view of such identification, the allegation of fraud and corruption pertaining to the entire recruitment process is not sustainable and the appointment of the 32,000 teachers cannot be interfered with," the division bench said.

The court held that a direction for job termination and re-examination at this stage would have dissimilar impact upon the appointees, observing that any such order would fail to secure fair play for the deserving teachers.

Referring to the investigation progress so far, the bench stated that unless "widespread or systematic irregularities" are established, a case for cancellation of all appointments cannot be made.

"Assessment of data does not reveal systemic cheating," the bench said, while observing that during the period of service rendered by the appellants, there were no allegations regarding the integrity or efficiency of those teachers.

The division bench said that the single bench of Justice Abhijit Gangopadhyay had in the judgment of May 12, 2023, gone beyond the pleadings, and cancelled the appointments made upon a purported finding that no aptitude test was held.

"In the dispensation of justice, courts are prevented from innovating at pleasure," the division bench stated in its 141-page judgment.

"Neither can they don the helmet of a knight errant roaming at will in pursuit of their own ideal of beauty or of goodness," it added in reference to the single bench order.

The division bench maintained that that courts should emphasise fairness, transparency and accountability in public service and will support wholesale cancellation of examinations if systemic irregularities undermine the process.

"However, a court is not expected to indulge in roving enquiry to rule out all possible explanations and alternative scenarios justifying such irregularities," the bench said.

Insisting that there is a "difference between a proven case of mass cheating" in a board examination and "unproven imputed charge of corruption", the court observed, "When services are terminated on the ground that the incumbent aided and abetted corruption, the court must satisfy itself that condition for this exists." Prayers for a stay of operation of the judgment were rejected by the division bench.

Some lawyers representing the petitioners said they were of the opinion that the judgment should be challenged before the Supreme Court. PTI AMR SMY NN