Read Time: 11 minutes

Synopsis

The Calcutta High Court has nullified the selection process of the State Level Selection Test-2016 (SLST) in government-sponsored and aided schools across West Bengal. The court's ruling mandated the cancellation of all appointments made through this process, stating that “Right to education as a fundamental right would entail a right to receive education from duly qualified personnel.”

The SLST-2016, intended to fill vacancies in government-sponsored and aided schools, attracted a staggering number of over 23 lakh candidates competing for 24,640 vacant posts. However, concerns regarding the fairness and transparency of the selection process emerged, prompting legal intervention.

The ruling, delivered by a division bench comprising Justice Debangsu Basak and Justice Md Shabbar Rashidi, observed that “The entire selection process is shrouded in such mystery and in such layers that it is difficult to fathom the quantum of illegalities performed.” As a consequence, the court held that “we are left with the only option of cancelling all appointments in the four categories of the selection process involved.”

The court's decision to nullify the SLST-2016 selection process was motivated by a multitude of discrepancies uncovered during the proceedings. These irregularities ranged from procedural violations to instances of nepotism and favouritism, casting doubt on the legitimacy of the appointments made through the said process.

The court criticised the State Government's action, stating that they seemed geared towards preventing the discovery of further manipulations or illegalities in the selection process. Furthermore, the court noted that the West Bengal School Service Commission (SSC), the Board, and the State Government consistently stonewalled inquiries regarding the selection process and failed to provide transparent answers regarding any manipulations or illegalities involved. The conduct of these three authorities during the hearings was deemed uncooperative and lacking in transparency.

The court revealed, blank OMR sheets had been submitted by certain candidates, and these candidates were subsequently shown to have scored sufficiently high numbers to be recommended for appointment and ultimately given positions. However, due to the non-cooperative attitude exhibited by the West Bengal SSC, the exact identities of these fraudulently appointed candidates could not be identified.

Furthermore, the court unveiled additional manipulations and illegalities in the selection process. Despite efforts to uncover the extent of these irregularities, it proved challenging to identify all individuals who had benefited from such actions. While some were identified, the full scope of the problem remained unclear.

In particular, concerning Group-D appointments, it was revealed that a staggering 48% had been obtained through manipulations or illegalities. Although the percentages decreased across the other three categories, they remained significant enough to raise serious doubts about the integrity of the entire selection process.

Regarding the selection process involving four categories, it was revealed that a written examination in the form of OMR sheets had been conducted. Shockingly, the original OMR sheets were destroyed by the West Bengal SSC, and no mirror image of these sheets was found in SSC's server by the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI), investigating the case. SSC, being an authority under Article 12 of the Constitution, appointed M/s NYSA for scanning and evaluating the OMR sheets, which further engaged another organisation, Data Scantech, for the task. However, the chairman of SSC claimed ignorance about Data Scantech's involvement until the court inquiry.

Furthermore, it was noted that M/s NYSA was appointed without an open tender, allegedly chosen as the lowest bidder among a select few. SSC failed to disclose the parameters for selection or justify its decision in court, raising concerns about competency and expertise. The appointment letter to M/s NYSA lacked detailed terms and conditions, indicating a lack of diligence on SSC's part. Additionally, the absence of mirror images of the OMR sheets in SSC's server, coupled with SSC, the State, and the Board's non-cooperative stance, exacerbated the situation.

Furthermore, the court observed that the merit list containing candidates' marks was never published, counselling was held after the panel's expiry, and Recruitment Rules governing the selection process were disregarded.

In light of these illegalities, the court has issued a series of directives aimed at rectifying the situation. These include:

1. Declaring all appointments made through the flawed selection process null and void.
2. Requiring individuals appointed unlawfully to return all remunerations and benefits received, with interest, to the state exchequer within four weeks.
3. Initiating further investigation by the CBI into the creation of supernumerary posts to accommodate illegal appointees.
4. Mandating SSC to conduct a fresh selection process for declared vacancies within a fortnight of the upcoming elections.
5. Ensuring transparency in the selection process by conducting appointments through open tender and adhering to Recruitment Rules.

The court said, “Retaining appointees selected through such a dubious process would be contrary to public interest.” Consequently, the court held that due to the pervasive vitiations throughout the entire selection process, it was compelled to declare all “appointments that have been granted in violations of Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution of India are nullity and void ab initio.”

Further, the court ordered the cancellation of all appointments granted through the tainted selection process.

 

Cause Title: Baishakhi Bhattacharyya (Chatterjee) & Ors. Vs.
State of West Bengal & Ors. [WPA 30649 of 2016] & other connected matters.