More than 5,300 school teachers in West Bengal, disqualified under the Supreme Court’s recent SSC recruitment verdict, may get a major relief. The state government is likely to request the Supreme Court not to enforce the salary refund order against the so-called “tainted” or “ineligible” teachers, arguing that it would be unjust and unconstitutional.
As per sources, the Bengal government plans to present a review petition in the apex court, stating that these teachers have worked for over five years and have already used their salaries for survival. The move comes after the Supreme Court upheld the Calcutta High Court’s order, which declared the recruitment process illegal and directed thousands of teachers and education staff to return their earnings.
However, 55 days after the judgment, none of the disqualified SSC teachers have returned their salaries, and the state has not taken any steps to recover the funds.
Relief for ‘Tainted’ SSC Teachers? Bengal Govt May Appeal Against Supreme Court’s Salary Refund Order
State May Cite Article 142 for Relief
In its legal argument, the West Bengal government is likely to invoke Article 142 of the Constitution, which empowers the Supreme Court to ensure “complete justice.” The petition may emphasize that forcing these teachers to refund years of salary after rendering services is akin to extracting unpaid labor, which goes against constitutional values.
Government insiders suggest that this humanitarian approach aligns with Chief Minister Mamata Banerjee’s recent statements, where she assured disqualified staff that alternative postings in other departments are being explored.
Legal Experts Divided
While some legal experts, like former Advocate General Joyontya Mitra, support the humanitarian argument, they also caution that it could be used as a cover to protect actual culprits behind the recruitment scam. Opposition voices argue that the state is attempting to shield those involved in bribe-driven appointments by using emotional appeals.
On the other hand, former Supreme Court Justice Ashok Ganguly took a hard stance, stating:
“If a thief argues that stealing required hard work, it doesn’t justify the crime.”
Concerns from Within
Officials in the Education Department are also worried. They believe such a petition could jeopardize the entire review process, especially after recent rejections of similar appeals by the Supreme Court.
According to Brindaban Ghosh, leader of the movement for “eligible” candidates, the state is mixing up qualified and disqualified individuals, and risking legal credibility by putting both in the same petition.
Impact on the System
The petition will reportedly include arguments on how scrapping over 26,000 appointments could cripple Bengal’s school infrastructure, affecting the education of more than 78 lakh students.
The government is also expected to reference NEET-related Supreme Court rulings, where the Court prioritized student futures over cancelling entire exams despite corruption.
SSC Recruitment Scam: The Bigger Picture
According to official Supreme Court data, 6,276 candidates were marked as “tainted.” However, the state pegs the figure at 5,303, claiming others were wrongfully included.
The government’s argument also points out that none of the genuine offenders who took bribes to facilitate illegal appointments have been fully identified yet, a key concern raised by both the judiciary and civil society.
What Lies Ahead
The government’s petition may also push for preferential treatment of “eligible” candidates in the upcoming SSC recruitment, possibly by granting them bonus marks based on teaching experience. However, legal experts warn this too could be struck down as it contradicts the Supreme Court’s stance against giving any special privileges.
Meanwhile, disqualified teachers insist they cannot repay salaries, claiming the order is inhumane and economically impossible.
With legal, political, and humanitarian aspects all intertwined, the fate of these thousands of teachers now rests on the Supreme Court’s decision in the upcoming review hearing.