Calcutta HC questions West Bengal about monthly allowance given to sacked non-teaching staff

Scroll.in

a day ago

The Calcutta High Court on Monday questioned the West Bengal government's decision to provide a monthly allowance to a group of non-teaching staff who had lost their jobs after the Supreme Court in April found irregularities in the 2016 recruitment process, Live Law reported.
Justice Amrita Sinha reserved the order in the matter but verbally questioned the state government for ' spending public money' through the disbursal of the amount, The Hindu reported.
The judge was hearing a writ petition challenging the provision of the allowance to the dismissed staff, according to the newspaper. The petition was filed by a candidate on the waitlist who was not recruited despite being on the merit list, allegedly due to irregularities in the hiring process.
On April 3, the Supreme Court upheld the Calcutta High Court's April 2024 order terminating the appointment of about 25,000 teachers and non-teaching staff by West Bengal's School Service Commission. The bench passed the order after observing that the recruitment process was 'vitiated by manipulation and fraud'.
The top court on April 17 permitted 'untainted' teachers to be retained until the end of the academic year or until fresh appointments are made, whichever is earlier. However, it did not grant relief to Group C and Group D employees, or non-teaching staff, whose appointments were also cancelled.
In response, the state government had announced in April that the sacked non-teaching staff would receive a monthly allowance until the Supreme Court delivered a verdict on review petitions filed by it, The Hindu reported.
During the hearing on Monday, the High Court questioned how the state government was paying a monthly allowance of Rs 20,000 to Rs 25,000 to the sacked non-teaching employees for 'sitting at home'.
'Thousands of [aspirants] remain unemployed but those whose appointments were cancelled are being paid to sit at home?' Sinha was quoted as saying by Live Law.
Advocate General Kishore Dutta, representing the state government, said that the amount was being disbursed in line with a government policy that cannot be disregarded.
The High Court noted that the money could not be given in a hurry as there were ' some protocols ' that had to be followed, The Indian Express reported.
Sinha also questioned the state government about whether there was any similar scheme for candidates who did not get jobs because of the irregularities in the recruitment process, The Hindu reported.
Dutta said that the allowance was 'being given purely on humanitarian grounds ' after the dismissed staff faced a ' sudden loss of livelihood '. He also highlighted that the scheme was 'temporary' and would end once the Supreme Court decided on the matter.
In April 2024, the High Court had passed its direction on the termination of the appointments based on the findings of a re-evaluation of the Optical Mark Recognition sheets from the 2016 recruitment examination in the case.
The re-evaluation found that the selected teachers had been recruited against blank Optical Mark Recognition sheets.