Original source (on modern site)
The Supreme Court today modified its earlier interim order protecting the appointments made in pursuance of the alleged West Bengal SSC recruitment scam, stating that those appointees whose appointments are found to be illegal shall be liable to refund their salaries.The top court has also permitted the CBI to continue its probe to determine the officials involved but precluded the agency... The Supreme Court today modified its earlier interim order protecting the appointments made in pursuance of the alleged West Bengal SSC recruitment scam, stating that those appointees whose appointments are found to be illegal shall be liable to refund their salaries. The top court has also permitted the CBI to continue its probe to determine the officials involved but precluded the agency from taking any coercive steps. The matter is now posted to July 16. The High Court had directed CBI to undertake further investigation and interrogate all persons who had received appointments after expiry of the panel and after submitting blank OMR sheets. State had also asked the central probe agency to undertake further investigations with regard to the persons involved in the State Government, approving creation of supernumerary post to accommodate illegal appointments. The interim protection was first granted by the Supreme Court on November 9, 2023 in another case (Achinta Kumar Mondal vs Laxmi Tunga). "We are of the view that an expeditious disposal of the matter will be in the interest of Justice, we accordingly direct that the proceedings be listed for hearing and final disposal on 16 July 2024. In the meantime, we are inclined to continue the ad interim protection granted by this Court in the order dated 9 November 2023, subject to the express stipulation that any person found to have been appointed illegally and has continued as a consequence of the present order shall undertake to refund the entire amount of the salary which may be paid from the date of this order and the final judgement of this court...this would cover the 4 categories of individuals." A bench comprising Chief Justice of India DY Chandrachud, Justice JB Pardiwala and Manoj Misra was hearing the petitions filed by the State of West Bengal, the SSC and certain affected employees challenging the April 22 judgment delivered by the Calcutta High Court, invalidating 25000 SSC jobs across government and aided schools on the ground of fraud. On the last hearing the Court had asked if it was possible to segregate untainted appointments from over 25,000 appointments made by the West Bengal School Service Commission (WB SSC) to teaching and non-teaching posts in 2016, which the Calcutta High Court directed to be set aside. However, the bench stayed the High Court's direction to the CBI to undertake further investigation with regard to the persons involved in the State Government approving supernumerary posts to accommodate illegal appointments and to take such persons into custodial interrogation if necessary. CJI asked if it was possible to segregate the untainted appointments given that the OMR sheets have been destroyed. Rohatgi replied that secondary materials are available. "The question for all of you is to demonstrate that where on the basis of material available it is possible to segregate valid and invalid appointments and who are the beneficiaries of the fraud. 25000 is a big number. We see that 25,0000 jobs taken away is a serious thing. Unless we see that the entire thing is fraught with fraud..." CJI observed. Background On April 22, the Calcutta High Court had invalidated these jobs across government and aided schools. The jobs came under the scanner due to the infamous cash-for-jobs recruitment scam. The State has argued that the High Court, instead of segregating the valid appointments from the invalid ones, has erroneously set aside the 2016 selection process entirely. It has also been averred that this will affect around 25,000 teaching and non-teaching staff in the State. It has also been pleaded that the High Court solely relied upon the oral arguments without the support of affidavits. Further, it has been argued that the High Court has acted in utter disregard of the fact that the same will result in a huge vacuum in the State Schools unless a new selection process is completed. The State has emphasized that this will adversely impact the students given that the new academic session is approaching. The State has also assailed the impugned order on the ground that it ordered the SSC to conduct a new selection process for declared vacancies within two weeks of the upcoming election results without acknowledging the understaffing issue in schools. Findings Of The High Court In a detailed order running into more than 280 pages, a division bench of Justices Debangsu Basak and Md Shabbar Rashidi cancelled the entire panel of the 2016 SSC Recruitment upon finding irregularities with OMR sheets and ordered the state to conduct fresh examinations for the same. Not only this, but the Court also directed the appointees, who were recognised to have been fraudulently appointed, to return the salary they had drawn. The Court observed that the entire panel of recruitment originating out of the 2016 recruitment process had been tainted due to the irregularities with the OMR sheets, many of which were found blank, and were liable to be cancelled. The Court also found that many of those whose appointments had been challenged had been appointed after the panel for the 2016 recruitment had expired by submitting blank OMR sheets. In view of the above projection, the Court had also directed an investigation into those who perpetrated the fraud and disposed of the pleas by canceling the entire 2016 SSC Recruitment Panel. Submissions of the Petitioners (1) the data on the basis of which the High Court has set aside the appointment of nearly 25,000 persons including the Asst Teacher and non-teaching staff is itself suspect. The foundation of the entire exercise is the certificate under Section 65B Evidence Act, issued by Pankaj Bansal a former employee of Scan Tech (company which carried out scanning and evaluation of the OMR sheets) from whose possession the 3 hard disks were seized (2) In the selection process of such a large magnitude, cancellation should be the last recourse, and where the segregation of the tainted candidates is possible only such appointments be directed to be discontinued (3) the above shall be considered a fortiori in a condition where petitions were filed 3 years after the appointments were made (4) while the appointments which are tainted can be identified it would be unjust for the High Court to set aside the entire process The respondents on the other hand supported the setting aside of the entire process. It submitted both the SSC and the state government were not in a position to state that the possibility of future illegalities can be ruled out. In this backdrop, when a systemic fraud has vitiated the entire process, the High Court was justified in setting aside the entirety of the selection process. Case Details : THE STATE OF WEST BENGAL vs. BAISHAKHI BHATTACHARYYA (CHATTERJEE) SLP(C) No. 009586 - / 2024 Click Here To Read/Download Order"In a modification of the previous order, we direct that the investigation ordered by HC as per clauses 7 and 8 in para 363 shall continue but no coercive steps be taken "