Calcutta HC dismisses plea of govt, SSC against debarring ‘tainted' candidates from fresh recruitment
Upholding the order of Justice Saugata Bhattacharya debarring identified tainted candidates from taking part in the fresh recruitment process, the Division Bench of Justice Soumen Sen and Justice Smita Das De dismissed the appeals of the WBSSC and the state government.
Appearing for the SSC, senior counsel Kalyan Banerjee argued that denying 'tainted candidates' from taking part in the fresh hiring would tantamount to 'double punishment'.
Stating that the Supreme Court, while cancelling the appointment of nearly 26,000 teaching and non-teaching staff, 'was careful enough not to debar them from future employment'. 'A penalty was imposed on them (tainted candidates) for committing the offence. They were asked to return their salary, and their jobs were taken away. Now, the question arises, will they get double punishment and be punished for life? Doesn't it violate the Constitution? No criminal charges have been proved against these 'tainted' candidates, but stringent punishment has been imposed on them. If they are not allowed to participate, it will be double punishment,' Banerjee submitted
Advocate General Kishore Dutta, representing the state government, said: 'The Supreme Court has given harsh punishment to the tainted candidates, but was careful enough not to debar them from future employment. Fundamental rights cannot be curtailed.'
However, senior counsel Bikash Ranjan Bhattacharya, appearing for the unsuccessful candidates, claimed that the Supreme Court in its order had not said that candidates can be appointed whose exam and results were declared void.
'The participation is confined to untainted and not specifically tainted. Tainted candidates cannot participate in the recruitment process. The state government and the SSC knew that tainted candidates were debarred from everything… The May 30th recruitment notice completely destroys the Supreme Court's order. Where in the Supreme Court order does the State get 'further vacancies'? This incorporation is directly misleading. With the introduction of new vacancies, the State wants to upset the Supreme Court's judgment. The argument of double punishment has no bearing,' Bhattacharya told the High Court.
Senior counsel Aninda Mitra, representing the untainted candidates, claimed 'circumstances were created by the tainted candidates in collusion with the officers of the Commission'.
'Prosecution cannot be two times, but for one prosecution, there can be multiple punishments. The Supreme Court had terminated their jobs and ordered them to refund money. So, two punishments were given by the Supreme Court. Thus, there is no question of double jeopardy,' Mitra said.
On April 3, the Supreme Court had upheld the Calcutta High Court order, which invalidated the appointment of over 25,000 teachers and non-teaching staff, recruited through the 2016 WBSSC examinations, terming the entire selection process 'tainted beyond resolution' and calling for a fresh selection process to fill the vacancies. Later, the Supreme Court extended the services of 'untainted' candidates employed as assistant teachers for Classes 9-12 until December 31, asking the state government to complete fresh recruitments by then.
A month later, the WBSSC issued a notification for the recruitment of over 35,000 school staff. Last Monday, the single judge HC bench debarred tainted candidates from the fresh recruitment.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Time of India
38 minutes ago
- Time of India
SC slams cartoonist Hemant Malviya over ‘immature' post targeting PM Modi and RSS
The Supreme Court on Monday chided Indore-based cartoonist Hemant Malviya for his "immature" cartoon that portrayed Prime Minister Narendra Modi and RSS in an "undignified" manner. A bench of justices Sudhanshu Dhulia and Aravind Kumar termed Malviya's conduct as "inflammatory" and "immature". The development took place during the hearing of an anticipatory bail plea filed by the cartoonist, who moved SC for relief after his plea was dismissed by the Madhya Pradesh High Court on July 8. "Still no maturity in him. It is indeed inflammatory," justice Dhulia verbally remarked. The court posted the matter for hearing on Tuesday. by Taboola by Taboola Sponsored Links Sponsored Links Promoted Links Promoted Links You May Like Why Seniors Are Losing Weight with These Barefoot Shoes – You Won't Believe It! Barefoot Vitality Undo Malviya was booked in May this year over the Facebook post on the complaint of an RSS member. The cartoonist stands accused of offences under sections 196 (promoting enmity between different groups), 299 (insulting religion or religious beliefs), 302 (act with intent to wound religious feelings), 352 (insult with intent to provoke breach of peace) and 353 (mischief) of Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita and Section 67A of the Information Technology Act.
NDTV
38 minutes ago
- NDTV
In Rare Order, Top Court's "New Lease Of Life" To Woman Who Killed Fiance
New Delhi: In a rare judgment, the Supreme Court on Monday stayed the arrest and life sentence of a girl and her boyfriend while upholding their conviction in her fiance's murder case. The court has also granted them 8 weeks' time to approach the Karnataka Governor for a pardon, calling it a case of "misjudged rebellion" and "romantic delusion". Shubha Shankar had killed her fiance Girish in 2003 with the help of her boyfriend, Arun and two others (Dinakaran and Venkatesh). Taking a sympathetic view, the top court observed that most of the accused were teenagers at that time and had the family not pressured the woman for marriage, the life of an innocent young man would have been saved. The court made these observations while dismissing their appeals against the Karnataka High Court judgment. "Voice of a young, ambitious girl, muffled by a forced family decision, created the fiercest of turmoil in her mind. This, backed by an unholy alliance of a mental rebellion and wild romanticism, led to the tragic murder of an innocent young man, while simultaneously destroying the lives of three others," said the Supreme Court. The top court said that it wants to view the matter from a different perspective to give "a new lease of life to the appellants who have committed a heinous crime, notwithstanding the availability of other alternative avenues to resolve the problems faced by A-4 (the woman)". It flagged the emotional and social breakdown that precipitated the crime, calling it a case of misjudged rebellion and romantic delusion. Giving them eight weeks' time to approach Governor Thawar Chand Gehlot for a pardon, urging him to note the circumstances governing the case. "We would like to facilitate the appellants' right to seek pardon by permitting them to file appropriate petitions before His Excellency the Hon'ble Governor of Karnataka. We would only request the constitutional authority to consider the same, which we hope and trust would be done by taking note of the relevant circumstances governing the case," the court said. "Accordingly, we grant eight weeks' time from the date of this judgment for the appellants to file appropriate petitions seeking to invoke the power of pardon under Article 161 of the Constitution. Till these petitions are duly considered and decided, the appellants shall not be arrested and their sentence shall remain suspended," it said. A bench of Justices MM Sundresh and Aravind Kumar also made several important observations. "We do not wish to end our judgment by merely rendering a conviction. We do believe that this Court has a little more role to play. Considering that we started our discussion keeping in mind that this unfortunate event would not have occurred, had the family been more sympathetic in understanding the mental predilection and disposition of the convicted girl ... It is important for us to make some observations." The judgment read. The bench observed: "Ultimately, the girl was unable to make a decision for herself, despite being an individual who had attained majority. Having said so, we cannot condone her action as it resulted in the loss of an innocent life of a young man. We would only state at this juncture that she was made to commit this offence by adopting the wrong course of action in order to address her problem." The top court added, "Years have rolled on since the occurrence of the crime, which was 2003. The appellants, who committed the offence with adrenaline pumping in their veins, have now reached middle age. Two out of the four accused persons were teenagers at the time of the occurrence, while the girl had barely crossed that phase. Accused 3 was a man aged 28 years, and was recently married with one child." The Supreme Court also cited the convicts' conduct in prison, which, it said, was "not adverse". "Their conduct in the prison is also not adverse. They were not born as criminals, but it was an error of judgment through a dangerous adventure which led to the commission of a heinous crime," the bench observed. The court also upheld Ms Shankar's separate conviction for destruction of evidence under Section 201.
Indian Express
an hour ago
- Indian Express
More than 20 states sue Trump administration over frozen after-school and summer program funding
More than 20 states have sued President Donald Trump's administration over billions of dollars in frozen funding for after-school and summer programs and other programs. Aiden Cazares is one of 1.4 million children and teenagers around the country who have been attending after-school and summer programming at a Boys & Girls Club, the YMCA or a public school for free thanks to federal taxpayers. Congress set aside money for the programs to provide academic support, enrichment and child care to mostly low-income families, but President Donald Trump's administration recently froze the funding. The money for the 21st Century Community Learning Centers is among more than $6 billion in federal education grants Trump's Republican administration has withheld, saying it wants to ensure recipients' programs align with the president's priorities. On Monday afternoon, more than 20 Democratic-led states sued the Trump administration to force the release of the money. Led by California, the lawsuit alleges withholding the money violates the Constitution and several federal laws. Many low-income families will lose access to after-school programs if the money isn't released soon, according to the suit. In some states, school restarts in late July and early August. In Rhode Island, the state stepped in with funding to keep the summer programs running, according to the Boys & Girls Club of East Providence. Other Boys & Girls Clubs supported by the grants have found ways to keep open their summer programs, said Sara Leutzinger, vice president for communications for the Boys & Girls Club of America. But there isn't the same hope for the after-school programming for the fall. Some of the 926 Boys & Girls Clubs nationwide that run 21st Century Community Learning summer and after-school programs stand to close if the Trump administration doesn't release the money in the next three to five weeks, Leutzinger said. The YMCA and Save the Children say many of the centers they run are also at risk of shuttering. 'Time is of the essence,' said Christy Gleason, executive director of Save the Children Action Network, which provides after-school programming for 41 schools in rural areas in Washington state and across the South, where school will begin as soon as August. 'It's not too late to make a decision so the kids who really need this still have it.' Schools in Republican-led areas are particularly affected by the freeze in federal education grants. Ninety-one of the 100 school districts that receive the most money from four frozen grant programs are in Republican congressional districts, according to an analysis from New America, a left-leaning think tank. Of those top 100 school districts, half are in four states: California, West Virginia, Florida and Georgia. New America's analysis used funding levels reported in 2022 in 46 states. Republican officials have been among the educators criticizing the grant freeze.'I deeply believe in fiscal responsibility, which means evaluating the use of funds and seeking out efficiencies, but also means being responsible — releasing funds already approved by Congress and signed by President Trump,' said Georgia schools superintendent Richard Woods, an elected Republican. 'In Georgia, we're getting ready to start the school year, so I call on federal funds to be released so we can ensure the success of our students.'The Office of Management and Budget said some grants supported left-wing causes, pointing to services for immigrants in the country illegally or LGBTQ+ inclusion efforts. At the East Providence summer camp, Aiden, a rising third grader, played tag, built structures with magnetic tiles, played a fast-paced game with the other kids to review addition and subtraction, learned about pollination, watched a nature video and ate club-provided chicken nuggets. Veteran teachers from his school corrected him when he spoke without raising his hand and offered common-sense advice when a boy in his group said something inappropriate. 'When someone says something inappropriate, you don't repeat it,' teacher Kayla Creighton told the boys between answering their questions about horseflies and honeybees. Indeed, it's hard to find a more middle-of-the road organization in this country than the Boys & Girls Club. Just last month, a Republican and a Democrat sponsored a resolution in the U.S. House celebrating the 165-year-old organization as a 'beacon of hope and opportunity.' The Defense Department awarded the club $3 million in 1991 to support children left behind when their parents deployed for the Persian Gulf. And ever since, the Boys & Girls Club has created clubs on military installations to support the children of service members. Military families can sign up their kids for free. 'I suspect they will realize that most of those grants are fine and will release them,' said Mike Petrilli, president of the Thomas B. Fordham Institute, a conservative education policy think tank, speaking of the Trump administration's review of the 21st Century Community Learning Center grants. But not everyone is so sure. Aiden's mother has started looking into afternoon child care for September when kids return to school in Rhode Island. 'It costs $220 a week,' Aiden's mother, Darleen Reyes, said, her eyes expanding. 'I can't afford that.' The single mother and state worker said she'll probably ask her 14-year-old son to stay home and watch Aiden. That will mean he would have to forgo getting a job when he turns 15 in the fall and couldn't play basketball and football. 'I don't have any other option,' she said. At home, Aiden would likely stay inside on a screen. That would be heartbreaking since he's thrived getting tutoring and 'learning about healthy boundaries' from the Boys & Girls Club program, Reyes said. Fernande Berard learned about the funding freeze and possible closure from a reporter after dropping off her three young boys for summer camp. 'I would be really devastated if this goes away,' said the nurse. 'I honestly don't know what I would do.' Her husband drives an Uber much of the day, and picking up the kids early would eat into his earnings. It's money they need to pay the mortgage and everything else. If her boss approves, she'd likely have to pick up her children from school and take them to the rehabilitation center where she oversees a team of nurses. The children would have to stay until her work day ends. 'It's hard to imagine,' she said.
