Latest news with #AmritaSinha
Hans India
10 hours ago
- Politics
- Hans India
Calcutta High Court Blocks Bengal Government's Stipend Plan For Dismissed Staff
The Calcutta High Court has intervened to block the West Bengal government's attempt to provide monthly stipends to non-teaching staff who lost their positions following a Supreme Court ruling on recruitment irregularities. Justice Amrita Sinha delivered the order on Friday, effectively halting the state government's stipend payments that were designed to support Group C and D non-teaching employees affected by the April Supreme Court judgment. The controversy stems from a major recruitment fraud that occurred in 2016 through the West Bengal School Service Commission (WBSSC). The Supreme Court had previously upheld the Calcutta High Court's decision to terminate the appointments of over 25,000 teaching and non-teaching staff members due to irregularities in the selection process. In April, a Supreme Court bench comprising former Chief Justice Sanjiv Khanna and Justice PV Sanjay Kumar characterized the recruitment process as fundamentally flawed and fraudulent. The court found evidence of systematic manipulation including OMR sheet tampering and rank falsification. Following the mass dismissals, the Mamata Banerjee-led state government announced a financial support package for affected non-teaching staff. The scheme proposed monthly stipends of Rs 25,000 for Group C employees and Rs 20,000 for Group D staff members. This compensation plan was the government's response to the widespread job losses resulting from the Supreme Court's strict enforcement of recruitment integrity standards. Multiple petitions were filed in the Calcutta High Court challenging both the government's stipend decision and the format of new recruitment processes being planned for teaching positions. The court reserved judgment on these matters the previous Monday before delivering Friday's ruling. The High Court's intervention reflects ongoing judicial scrutiny of how the state government handles the aftermath of the recruitment scandal. The Supreme Court's April decision was unambiguous in its condemnation of the 2016 recruitment process. The court described the appointments as fraudulent and equivalent to cheating, finding no grounds to overturn the High Court's original dismissal order. However, the Supreme Court did provide some relief by ruling that dismissed employees would not be required to return salaries they had already received during their employment period. The case highlights the broader implications of recruitment fraud in public sector employment. With over 25,000 positions affected across state-run and state-aided schools, the scandal has had significant consequences for both the education system and the individuals whose careers were disrupted. The High Court's latest ruling adds another layer of complexity to the state government's efforts to address the fallout from the recruitment irregularities while maintaining judicial oversight of remedial measures.
&w=3840&q=100)
Business Standard
10 hours ago
- Politics
- Business Standard
TMC slams Oppn after HC stays relief scheme for sacked non-teaching staff
The TMC on Friday reiterated its respect for the judiciary but strongly criticised opposition parties for allegedly "denying humanitarian relief" to thousands of non-teaching staff who lost their jobs after the Supreme Court quashed the 2016 recruitment process, calling the move by the opposition parties inhumane. The remarks came immediately after the Calcutta High Court restrained the West Bengal government from implementing a scheme that sought to provide monetary support to sacked Group C and D staff until September 26 or until further orders, whichever is earlier. Justice Amrita Sinha passed the interim order on petitions challenging the state's proposal to pay Rs 25,000 to each affected Group C employee and Rs 20,000 to each Group D staff member. The court had reserved its verdict on June 9. The state government has been asked to file its affidavit in opposition within four weeks, and the petitioners have been given a further two weeks to respond. Responding to the court's order, TMC spokesperson and senior leader Kunal Ghosh alleged that certain political elements were "deriving monstrous glee" from the misfortune of those who lost their livelihoods. "Following the SC directive, over 26,000 people lost their jobs, bringing monstrous glee to some. It was our compassionate Chief Minister Mamata Banerjee who stood by the affected," Ghosh said. He noted that while a review petition is currently underway in the Supreme Court, a new recruitment process has also been initiated in compliance with the apex court's judgment. "In SC's respect, a recruitment process was also initiated. Additionally, relief was arranged on humanitarian grounds by the CM for Group C and Group D employees who lost their livelihood. There was opposition to that, and Calcutta HC Justice Amrita Sinha issued a stay on that as well," Ghosh added. "We will follow a legal recourse, but we will also identify who moves courts and get these inhumane orders," he said, launching a veiled attack on opposition leaders who have publicly supported the legal challenges to the scheme. The West Bengal government had earlier launched the scheme to provide "limited livelihood, support and social security on humanitarian grounds" on a temporary basis, and made it subject to the orders of any competent court. The initiative came after nearly 26,000 teaching and non-teaching staff in government-aided and -sponsored schools were dismissed following a Supreme Court judgment that held the 2016 recruitment process conducted by the West Bengal School Service Commission to be tainted. The ruling TMC had defended the relief package as a stop-gap measure to support distressed families until fresh appointments could be made.
India Today
11 hours ago
- Politics
- India Today
Calcutta High Court stops Bengal's stipends for non-teaching staff move
The Calcutta High Court on Friday paused the Bengal government's decision to offer stipends to non-teaching staff of the 2016 batch after the Supreme Court upheld the dismissal of their jobs in April in the jobs-for-cash Amrita Sinha, who had reserved the order last Monday, halted the payment of stipends for Group C and D non-teaching Mamata Banerjee-headed Bengal government announced a Rs 25,000 stipend for Group C staff, and Rs 20,000 for Group D after the top court's massive April Separate petitions were filed at the Calcutta High Court, challenging the format of the fresh selection process for teachers and also Banerjee's decision to provide non-teaching staff with a monthly April, the Supreme Court had blasted the Bengal government as it upheld the High Court's decision to reject the appointments of more than 25,000 teaching and non-teaching staff by the West Bengal School Service Commission (WBSSC) in 2016 in connection with the jobs-for-cash scam.A bench of former Chief Justice of India Sanjiv Khanna, and Justice PV Sanjay Kumar called the selection process fraudulent, amounting to cheating."We find no reason to interfere with the decision of the High Court that the services of tainted candidates and their appointment be terminated. Since their appointment was by fraud, this amounts to cheating," the bench High Court had cited serious irregularities such as OMR sheet tampering and rank manipulation, thereby dismissing the appointments of 25,753 teachers and non-teaching staff in state-run and state-aided schools. In its April ruling, the Supreme Court, however, said that candidates already appointed need not hand over the salary given so far. IN THIS STORY#West Bengal#Mamata Banerjee
The Hindu
11 hours ago
- Politics
- The Hindu
Calcutta High Court restrains West Bengal Government from giving monetary support to 'jobless' Group C, D school employees
The Calcutta High Court on Friday (June 20, 2025) restrained the West Bengal Government from implementing a scheme till September 26 to provide monetary support to non-teaching staff who lost their jobs following a Supreme Court judgment that held the selection process tainted. The Court had on June 9, 2025 reserved judgment on the petitions, which opposed the payment of ₹25,000 each to Group C and ₹20,000 each to Group D employees who lost their jobs on the Supreme Court Order, by the State. Retain school staff till new recruitment, Supreme Court tells West Bengal In an interim order, Justice Amrita Sinha restrained the State Government from giving any effect or further effect to the scheme for providing monetary relief to the non-teaching staff till September 26 or until further order, whichever is earlier. She directed the State Government to file its affidavit in opposition to the contentions of the petitioners in four weeks and reply by the petitioners within a fortnight thereafter. The West Bengal Government had introduced a scheme to provide "limited livelihood, support and social security on humanitarian ground" on temporary basis, subject to orders of any competent court, to distressed families of non-teaching staff in Group C and D categories, who were recruited through the 2016 selection process conducted by the West Bengal School Service Commission. Nearly, 26,000 teaching and non-teaching staff of West Bengal Government-sponsored and -aided schools lost their jobs on a Supreme Court judgment, which found the 2016 selection process tainted.
Hans India
13-06-2025
- Politics
- Hans India
WBSSC job case: Calcutta HC reserves verdict on petition challenging Bengal govt stipend for non-teaching staff
Kolkata: The Calcutta High Court on Friday concluded the hearing on a petition challenging the West Bengal government notification for a monthly stipend to be paid to non-teaching staff, under Group-C and Group-D categories, who lost their jobs in state-run schools in the state following a Supreme Court order, and reserved its verdict. The counsels for both the petitioners and the state government submitted their closing remarks before the single-judge bench of Justice Amrita Sinha, who then reserved the judgment. The state government counsel, in his closing remarks, questioned the interest of the petitioners in blocking the stipend for the job-losing non-teaching staff. The counsel for the petitioner, in his counter-argument, claimed that since the stipend is being paid from the state government exchequer constituted by public money, anyone has the right to seek justification behind how that money is spent. During the previous hearing in the matter on June 9, Justice Sinha raised questions on the basis of the calculations on which stipend amounts for Group-C and Group-D staff were determined. At the same time, she also questioned whether there had been instances in the past of the state government paying stipends to job-losing state government employees. She also questioned what the state government would get in return from those job-losing non-teaching staff against the stipend paid to them. Last month, the West Bengal government issued a notification announcing the new scheme under the state Labour Department. Under the "West Bengal Livelihood and Special Security Interim Scheme', the job-losing Group-C staff would be entitled to a monthly stipend of Rs 25,000, while those in the Group D category would be entitled to Rs 20,000 monthly. Announcing the launch of the scheme, Chief Minister Mamata Banerjee said that the scheme was planned under the state Labour Department because of the tendencies of some people and vested interests to file public interest litigations at the Calcutta High Court against any decision of the state government. However, with three successive petitions being filed at the Calcutta High Court, the state government's desire to avoid a legal battle over the scheme was not fulfilled. On April 3, the Supreme Court upheld the Calcutta High Court order that annulled 25,753 school appointments made through the WBSSC, observing that the panel had to be scrapped entirely due to the authorities' failure to distinguish between "tainted" and "untainted" candidates. The state government and the WBSSC have since filed review petitions in the Supreme Court seeking reconsideration of the order.
