The High Court of Calcutta endorsed order Cancelling the Appointment Of 94 Teachers Found Ineligible Under the 2014 Eligibility Test
WPA 9979 of 2022
Soumen Nandy vs. The State of West Bengal & Ors
CORAM: Hon’ble Justice Amrita Sinha
Introduction
The High Court of Calcutta has recently endorsed its order canceling the appointment letters of 94 teachers, who were found unqualified under the Teachers Eligibility Test conducted in 2014.
Facts of the case
an application for the addition of parties filed by ninety applicants claiming themselves to be prejudicially affected by the order passed by this Bench on 10th October The aforesaid order was passed relying upon a report in the form of the affidavit filed by the West Bengal Board of Primary Education with a finding that ninety-four candidates did not qualify in TET 2014 but were issued appointment letter. The Board arrived at the finding described above after verification of all records. The said ninety-four candidates were allowed to produce documents in support of their educational qualification, but as the said candidates were unable to produce any document in support of their TET qualification, the Board found them to be ineligible for appointment.
Under such circumstances, the Court directed the respective District Primary Schools Councils to cancel the letter of appointment issued in favor of the ninety-four candidates who did not possess the requisite qualifications for being appointed as primary school teachers.
Learned senior counsel representing the applicants submits that in terms of the order passed by this Court on 10th October 2023, the Primary School Council has canceled the letter of appointment issued in favor of the applicants and terminated their service.
It has been submitted that there has been no suppression of material facts by the applicants in the recruitment process. The applicants produced all the educational certificates supporting their candidature; relying upon which letter of appointment was issued. The applicants are in service for a considerable period, that is, from the year 2017 to 2023, and by this time they have acquired a permanent status in service. The Council could not have terminated their service without initiating any disciplinary proceeding against them The submissions of the applicants have been strongly opposed by the learned advocates representing the writ petitioners and the learned advocate representing the applicants.
The court noted that despite not being TET qualified, the candidates were issued letters of appointment, and the same was the subject of ongoing proceedings and investigation by central agencies.
It was found that even the division bench had declined to interfere with the single-bench order since the appellants had not disclosed their TET certificates, which had not been done on the present occasion as well. The judgment referred by the court
Pramod Kumar vs. UP Secondary Education Services Commission & Ors. reported in (2008) 7 SCC 153
the Hon’ble Supreme Court inter alia held that if the essential educational qualification for recruitment to a post is not satisfied, ordinarily the same cannot be condoned. Such an act cannot be ratified. An appointment that is contrary to the statute/statutory rules would be void in law, a nullity. The Court further held that a candidate must establish the existence of a legal right in himself and a corresponding legal duty in the State. If he did not possess the requisite qualifications to hold a post, he could not have any legal right to continue. It is, therefore, immaterial whether any proceeding is initiated against him or not. National Fertilizer Limited vs. Somvir Singh reported in (2006) 5 SCC 493
it was inter alia held that if the appointment is made without following the Rules, the same being a nullity, the question of confirming the employees would not arise. Adherence to Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution is a must in the process of public employment State of Bihar & Ors. vs. Kirti Narayan Prasad reported in 2018 SCC Online SC 2615
the Court held that the employees whose appointment was illegal and void ab initio cannot be said to be civil servants of the State. There is no requirement to initiate disciplinary proceedings against them for terminating their service.
Analysis of the court
the Court is not convinced that the applicants possess the requisite educational qualification for appointment as primary school teachers in terms of the recruitment notice and, as such, the Court declines to allow the applications filed by them seeking addition and modification of the subject order.
The Council recommended the termination of ineligible candidates after observing the principles of natural justice. Had the applicants not been given the opportunity of hearing or the applicants not been given a chance to produce testimonials in support of their educational qualification, then the case would have been otherwise. As it appears that, the order of termination was rightly issued on detection of the ineligibility of the applicants to be appointed as primary school teachers, accordingly, the Court refrains from modifying/ vacating/ varying the order as sought for by the applicants.
PRIME LEGAL is a full-service law firm that has won a National Award and has more than 20 years of experience in an array of sectors and practice areas. Prime legal falls into the category of best law firm, best lawyer, best family lawyer, best divorce lawyer, best divorce law firm, best criminal lawyer, best criminal law firm, best consumer lawyer, best civil lawyer.”
Written By
Kaulav Roy Chowdhury