WBSSC recruitment case: Commission questions Calcutta HC's authority to hear contempt-of-court petition

Kolkata, April 23 The counsel of the West Bengal School Service Commission (WBSSC), on Wednesday, questioned the authority of a division bench of the Calcutta High Court to hear a contempt-of-court petition against the Commission and the state government in relation to the recent Supreme Court order cancelling 25,753 teaching and non-teaching jobs in state-run schools.

Calcutta High Court’s same division bench of Justice Debangsu Basak and Justice Shabbar Rashidi last year had cancelled 25,753 teaching and non-teaching jobs, which is the entire panel of WBSSC for 2016. The state government approached the Supreme Court challenging the order.

Earlier this month, the Supreme Court bench of Chief Justice of India Sanjiv Khanna and Justice Sanjay Kumar upheld the order of the Calcutta High Court and also accepted the observation that the entire panel had to be cancelled because of the failure on the part of the state government and the Commission to segregate the “genuine” candidates from the “tainted" ones.

Thereafter, the contempt-of-court petition was filed against the West Bengal government and WBSSC, accusing the latter of not implementing the order of the apex court. The matter came up for hearing on Wednesday when the Commission’s counsel questioned the authority of the same division bench to hear the contempt-of-court petition.

The WBSSC counsel said that although the Supreme Court earlier this month had upheld the order of the Calcutta High Court’s division bench, at the same time, the apex court ordered some changes in the Calcutta High Court order. Hence, the WBSSC counsel argued that any hearing in the matter now could only be at the Supreme Court.

However, the counsel for the petitioner, in his counter-argument, submitted that since the apex court had upheld the main part of the Calcutta High Court’s order, which was regarding the cancellation of the entire panel for WBSSC for 2016, the said division bench had every authority to hear the contempt-of-court petition.

Thereafter, the division bench directed the counsel of the petitioner to submit relevant documents in support of his arguments to the court on the next date of hearing which is April 28.

Disclaimer: This post has been auto-published from an agency feed without any modifications to the text and has not been reviewed by an editor