Calcutta High Court Blocks Bengal Government's Stipend Plan For Dismissed Staff
The Calcutta High Court has intervened to block the West Bengal government's attempt to provide monthly stipends to non-teaching staff who lost their positions following a Supreme Court ruling on recruitment irregularities.
Justice Amrita Sinha delivered the order on Friday, effectively halting the state government's stipend payments that were designed to support Group C and D non-teaching employees affected by the April Supreme Court judgment.
The controversy stems from a major recruitment fraud that occurred in 2016 through the West Bengal School Service Commission (WBSSC). The Supreme Court had previously upheld the Calcutta High Court's decision to terminate the appointments of over 25,000 teaching and non-teaching staff members due to irregularities in the selection process.
In April, a Supreme Court bench comprising former Chief Justice Sanjiv Khanna and Justice PV Sanjay Kumar characterized the recruitment process as fundamentally flawed and fraudulent. The court found evidence of systematic manipulation including OMR sheet tampering and rank falsification.
Following the mass dismissals, the Mamata Banerjee-led state government announced a financial support package for affected non-teaching staff. The scheme proposed monthly stipends of Rs 25,000 for Group C employees and Rs 20,000 for Group D staff members.
This compensation plan was the government's response to the widespread job losses resulting from the Supreme Court's strict enforcement of recruitment integrity standards.
Multiple petitions were filed in the Calcutta High Court challenging both the government's stipend decision and the format of new recruitment processes being planned for teaching positions. The court reserved judgment on these matters the previous Monday before delivering Friday's ruling.
The High Court's intervention reflects ongoing judicial scrutiny of how the state government handles the aftermath of the recruitment scandal.
The Supreme Court's April decision was unambiguous in its condemnation of the 2016 recruitment process. The court described the appointments as fraudulent and equivalent to cheating, finding no grounds to overturn the High Court's original dismissal order.
However, the Supreme Court did provide some relief by ruling that dismissed employees would not be required to return salaries they had already received during their employment period. The case highlights the broader implications of recruitment fraud in public sector employment. With over 25,000 positions affected across state-run and state-aided schools, the scandal has had significant consequences for both the education system and the individuals whose careers were disrupted.
The High Court's latest ruling adds another layer of complexity to the state government's efforts to address the fallout from the recruitment irregularities while maintaining judicial oversight of remedial measures.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
News18
2 hours ago
- News18
'Act Was Brutal But...': MP HC Commutes Death Sentence Of Man Who Raped 4-Year-Old
Last Updated: The court held that while the convict's actions were horrifying, they were not executed with a degree of cruelty or depravity that would justify the death penalty. The Madhya Pradesh High Court on Thursday commuted the death sentence of a 20-year-old tribal man convicted of raping a 4-year-old child, converting the punishment to rigorous imprisonment for 25 years. The Court acknowledged the 'barbaric" nature of the act but found that it did not rise to the level of 'brutality" necessary to warrant capital punishment. The Division Bench of Justice Vivek Agarwal and Justice Devnarayan Mishra held that while the convict's actions were horrifying, they were not executed with a degree of cruelty or depravity that would justify the death penalty. 'In this case, no doubt that appellant's act was brutal as he has committed rape upon the victim of four years and three months of age and after committing rape also throttled her treating her dead and thrown the victim in such a place where she could not be searched and left the spot but it is also clear that he has not committed brutality," the Court observed, distinguishing between the two concepts while citing Supreme Court precedents. Background of the Case The convict, a 20-year-old from a Scheduled Tribe, was sentenced to death by a trial court for abducting and raping a 4-year-old girl and leaving her for dead in a mango orchard. The trial court had noted that the victim suffered permanent disability as a result of the assault. The incident occurred after the convict allegedly entered the complainant's hut under the pretext of requesting a cot and later abducted the minor victim from a nearby house during the night. He was later arrested and charged under Sections 450, 363, 376(a), 376AB, 307, and 201 of the IPC and Sections 5 and 6 of the POCSO Act. Advocate Samar Singh Rajpoot, appearing for the Appellant, argued that the case rested entirely on circumstantial evidence, with no eyewitness testimony or conclusive proof linking the convict to the crime. He contended that the post-mortem report did not conclusively support the trial court's finding of permanent disability and that the evidence had likely been fabricated post-arrest. He further urged the Court to consider mitigating factors including the convict's age, clean record, illiteracy, tribal background, and the fact that he had been working in a roadside eatery after leaving home at a young age. State's Response Opposing the appeal, Deputy Advocate General Yash Soni argued that the gravity of the offence, committed against a 4-year-old and followed by the child being left to die, warranted no leniency. He asserted that the prosecution had proved the case beyond reasonable doubt. High Court's Observations The Court rejected the defence argument that the child had suffered permanent disability, noting that the only medical testimony, by Dr. Rakesh Shukla, did not provide clear evidence or specify the nature or extent of injury that could establish lifelong disability. However, it upheld the conviction under all relevant sections, including aggravated rape under the POCSO Act, while commuting the sentence on the ground that the act, though 'barbaric," did not involve 'brutality" in the legal sense established by the Supreme Court in Manoharan v. State, Bhaggi v. State of MP, and Dhananjoy Chatterjee v. State of West Bengal. 'There is no report that he has previously committed any such type of offence… He is not properly educated," the Court noted. Final Sentence The High Court affirmed the convictions but converted the death penalty to 25 years of rigorous imprisonment without remission, along with a fine of Rs.10,000 under Section 6 of the POCSO Act. In default of payment, the convict will undergo an additional year of rigorous imprisonment.
Hans India
2 hours ago
- Hans India
Congress MP Criticises BRS for spreading misinformation on govt
In a media conference held in Hyderabad, Congress MP Chamala Kiran Kumar Reddy condemned the BRS leaders for alleging that CM Revanth Reddy is allied with Andhra Pradesh Chief Minister Chandrababu Naidu. Chamala Kiran Kumar Reddy highlighted growing public awareness around alleged irregularities related to the Kaleshwaram project, noting that citizens are actively researching the matter online. "The BRS-led government did not raise concerns during the implementation of the Rayalaseema lift irrigation and Pothireddypadu projects. In contrast, the Congress government is taking significant measures to on Godavari -Bankacharla project," MP said. He said that Chief Minister Revanth Reddy has stated that if necessary, we will escalate the matter to the Supreme Court and made it clear that if the Central Government ignores our proposals, we will pursue legal action," remarked Kiran Kumar Reddy. He further accused BRS leaders of attempting to mislead the public by inciting regional sentiments in Telangana.
Scroll.in
2 hours ago
- Scroll.in
Karnataka HC stays SIT probe into land grabbing allegations against Union minister HD Kumaraswamy
The Karnataka High Court on Thursday ordered an interim stay on an inquiry by a Special Investigation Team into allegations of land grabbing by Union minister HD Kumaraswamy, Live Law reported. The Janata Dal (Secular) leader and former chief minister of Karnataka has been accused of encroaching on 14.04 acres of government land in Kethaganahalli in the state's Ramanagara district. On January 28, the state government formed a Special Investigation Team headed by Bengaluru Regional Commissioner Amlan Aditya Biswas to look into the allegations. The tehsildar of the Ramanagara taluk had issued summons to Kumaraswamy on May 29. However, on Thursday, Justice ES Indiresh of the High Court stayed the inquiry, noting that there appeared to be no official notification for forming the Special Investigation Team, PTI reported. The judge stayed both the formation of the SIT as well as the summons issued to Kumaraswamy. He directed the state government to respond to the Janata Dal (Secular) leader's petition challenging the legality of the investigation. An activist named SR Hiremath had made the allegations of land grabbing against Kumaraswamy in 2020, The Hindu reported. He had claimed that the former chief minister and his relatives had encroached on grazing land in Kethiganahalli, and that despite a High Court order for the land to be recovered, no action was taken. Hiremath's organisation, Samaj Parivartana Samudaya, has filed a contempt petition in the High Court, questioning why action was not taken. However, Kumaraswamy has claimed that he legally purchased multiple plots in the village between 1985 and 1987 through registered sale deeds. He maintained that he had been in lawful possession of the land for nearly 40 years. The former chief minister added that the tehsildar had no jurisdiction to issue the notice as such a power was vested only with the assistant commissioner under the provisions of the Karnataka Land Revenue Act.
