
WBSSC Job Case: Bengal Govt Yet To Decide On Challenge Plea For 'Tainted' Candidates
The selection process is for filling up teaching job posts in the state lying vacant following a Supreme Court order in April, cancelling 25,753 school jobs.
A member of the state cabinet said on strict condition of anonymity that while legal experts are being consulted on the effectiveness of approaching the Supreme Court in the matter, the party leadership seems to be divided on this issue.
One section, according to him, is in favour of approaching the apex court, challenging the division bench order, so that the state government can send a signal to all job losers that it has moved to the extreme level to protect jobs for all.
However, he added, those against approaching the apex court feel that the observations both by the single-judge bench and the division bench of the Calcutta High Court for excluding identified“tainted” candidates leave no merit for the matter to be dragged to the apex court level.
Both the single-judge bench and the division bench in their respective orders observed that the Supreme Court's division bench in its order on April this year, cancelling 25,753 school jobs, also ruled for barring identified“tainted” candidates from participating in the fresh selection procedure.
Last Monday, Calcutta High Court's single-judge bench of Justice Saugata Bhattacharya ordered that the candidates already identified as“tainted” should be excluded from the fresh selection process and also said that if any such candidate who had already been identified as“tainted” had submitted his application for the fresh recruitment process, his or her application should be summarily rejected.
The state government and the WBSSC approached the division bench of Justice Soumen Sen and Justice Smita Das, challenging that part of the single-judge bench order which directed the exclusion of identified“tainted” candidates from the fresh recruitment process.
On Thursday, the division bench of Justice Sen and Justice Das came out with its order upholding the single-judge bench order.
Through this order, the division bench also rejected the counsel of the state government that denying permission to the identified“tainted” candidates to participate in the fresh recruitment process of the commission would mean double punishment for such candidates.

Legal Disclaimer:
MENAFN provides the
information “as is” without warranty of any kind. We do not accept
any responsibility or liability for the accuracy, content, images,
videos, licenses, completeness, legality, or reliability of the information
contained in this article. If you have any complaints or copyright
issues related to this article, kindly contact the provider above.
Most popular stories
Market Research

- VUBE Exchange Announces Unified Account Integration Across VUBE Pro, VUBE Plus, And VUBE Max
- Fitell Corporation Launches Solana (SOL) Digital Asset Treasury With $100M Financing Facility, With Focus On Yield And On-Chain Defi Innovation
- Meanwhile, Bitcoin Life Insurer, Secures $82M To Meet Soaring Demand For Inflation-Proof Savings
- Edgen Launches Multi‐Agent Intelligence Upgrade To Unify Crypto And Equity Analysis
- The Bitcoin Way Launches Panama Discovery Trip - A Premium 3-Day Plan B Experience
- Seoul Exchange, One Of Only Two Licensed Platforms For Unlisted Securities, Will Exclusively Use Story To Settle Tokenized Rwas
Comments
No comment