Court’s Decision
The Calcutta High Court declared the selection process for appointment of teachers in West Bengal government-aided schools through the 2016 recruitment process of the West Bengal School Service Commission as “vitiated by illegality and fraud of the highest order”. The Court held that the entire selection process stood vitiated and directed that it must be re-conducted starting from the evaluation of the Optical Mark Recognition (OMR) sheets. The appointments made pursuant to the manipulated process were quashed.
The Court observed:
“It is not a case of malpractice or an irregularity, it is a clear case of fraud practiced on the Constitution by persons in high public office”.
Facts
A Public Interest Litigation and several connected writ petitions were filed alleging massive irregularities and manipulation in the selection process conducted by the West Bengal School Service Commission in 2016 for recruitment of Assistant Teachers in classes IX and X. It was contended that hundreds of unqualified or lower-ranked candidates were illegally appointed by manipulating the merit list, tampering with OMR sheets, and ignoring the recommendations made on the basis of actual performance.
During investigation, it was found that the serial numbers of several recommendation letters did not match the records, many OMR sheets were tampered with post-evaluation, and that several ineligible candidates were included in the recommendation list. It was further revealed that many of these candidates had direct connections with influential people in power.
Issues
- Whether the selection process conducted in 2016 by the School Service Commission was tainted by fraud and illegality?
- Whether the appointments made pursuant to the manipulated recommendation lists can be sustained?
- What remedial measures should be undertaken in light of the findings?
Petitioner’s Arguments
The petitioners contended that the selection process was riddled with fraudulent practices, including the manipulation of OMR sheets after they had been evaluated, issuance of fake recommendation letters, and appointment of undeserving candidates. They submitted that qualified candidates had been illegally denied appointments and that the integrity of the entire selection process stood compromised.
It was also submitted that there was deliberate destruction of records, and that these acts could not have been perpetrated without the knowledge and active support of higher officials, including those in the West Bengal Board of Secondary Education.
Respondent’s Arguments
The West Bengal School Service Commission and the State authorities argued that the selection process was conducted in accordance with law and that any discrepancies were at best administrative errors that did not vitiate the entire process. They contended that some irregularities did not justify scrapping the entire selection and that innocent candidates would suffer if such a drastic step were taken.
They further argued that the process had been completed years ago and appointments had been made, and therefore the matter should now be allowed to rest in the interest of stability in the education system.
Analysis of the Law
The Court held that the principle of fairness in public employment is a constitutional mandate under Article 14 and 16. Any manipulation or deviation from the prescribed procedure in recruitment amounts to a fraud on the Constitution. It found that there were multiple layers of fraud, including post-evaluation tampering of OMR sheets, issuance of illegitimate recommendation letters, and the inclusion of candidates without any basis in merit.
It reiterated that fraud vitiates everything and that courts have the power to intervene even after the appointments have been made, if the selection process is found to be tainted.
Precedent Analysis
The Court relied on the following key judgments:
- Ashok Kumar Yadav v. State of Haryana, (1985) 4 SCC 417: Held that even a partial vitiation of selection process due to bias or illegality can render the entire process invalid.
- Union of India v. O. Chakradhar, (2002) 3 SCC 146: The Supreme Court held that appointments made through a tainted selection process are liable to be set aside.
- K. Vijaya Lakshmi v. State of A.P., (2001) 4 SCC 725: Where manipulation in the selection list was discovered, the entire process was held liable to be scrapped.
These precedents reinforced the Court’s view that systemic fraud in public employment cannot be condoned.
Court’s Reasoning
The Court emphasized that public employment must be governed by transparency, fairness and equality. It observed that in the present case, the manipulation had occurred on such a wide scale and with such impunity that the entire exercise lost credibility.
It noted that despite repeated orders, relevant records were either not produced or were found to have been destroyed. This indicated a concerted effort to shield the wrongdoers and confirmed the mala fide intent behind the selection process.
The Court further noted that the appointments were not made based on merit but were “doled out as political favours” in return for allegiance.
It concluded that allowing such appointments to stand would be a mockery of constitutional values.
Conclusion
The Court set aside the entire selection process conducted under the 2016 recruitment cycle and directed a fresh evaluation of OMR sheets to be carried out under strict supervision. It held that only those candidates who had cleared the evaluation based on merit would be considered for fresh recommendations.
The Court clarified that those who had already been appointed would not be allowed to continue and would be disqualified if found to have been recommended through illegal means.
Implications
The ruling has far-reaching implications for recruitment processes in public institutions. It reaffirms that fairness and transparency are non-negotiable in public employment. The judgment sends a strong message that constitutional courts will not tolerate manipulation and fraud, especially in matters affecting the future of thousands of candidates and the integrity of public institutions.
It also paves the way for potential criminal prosecution of officials and beneficiaries involved in the fraud, and may open up similar scrutiny of other recruitments undertaken by the Commission during the same period.
FAQs
1. Why did the Court cancel the entire recruitment process instead of just the faulty appointments?
Because the Court found systemic fraud affecting the entire process—from tampered OMR sheets to fake recommendation letters—making it impossible to isolate only specific instances of illegality.
2. Will candidates who were already appointed lose their jobs?
Yes, the Court has made it clear that appointments based on fraudulent recommendations will not stand and such individuals will be disqualified.
3. What will happen next in the recruitment process?
The Court has directed the School Service Commission to re-evaluate OMR sheets afresh under strict supervision, and only genuine candidates based on merit will be recommended for appointment.
