Kolkata: After a Calcutta High Court division bench on Wednesday set aside an earlier single-judge order that had cancelled the appointment of 32,000 primary teachers recruited through the 2014 selection process, senior Trinamool Congress (TMC) leader Bratya Basu said the ruling has two key facets.
While it secures the jobs of the 32,000 primary teachers, he noted, it also delivers strong criticism of the Single Bench’s earlier order.
“The Division Bench made some interesting observations. It said that judges’ job is not to find out faults with the help of a microscope. It further observed that the judges are not like mediaeval knights who would step out at night with helmets on to find out good or bad in society,” Basu said during a Press conference.
He added that the Division Bench, in its observation, further observed that the judges should not be hyper active. It also made a clear observation that a fresh examination cannot be thrust upon these teachers after so long.
Referring to the court’s observation, Basu questioned whether society takes responsibility for the humiliation faced by families when people lose their jobs in such cases. He also wondered whether then-Justice Abhijit Gangopadhyay became an MP at the cost of depriving 26,000 teachers of their jobs.
During the Press conference, TMC spokesperson Arup Chakraborty said that “anti-Bengal conspirators have been defeated”.
Questioning the former judge Ganguly’s role in the earlier order, Chakraborty suggested that it was clear now that Ganguly was acting as a “BJP broker” and not an impartial judge.
Chakraborty asserted that the Division Bench’s decision proved the state’s recruitment process was correct and thwarted a “conspiracy” to destroy the future of the
state’s youth.
Meanwhile, BJP spokesperson and petitioner Tarunjyoti Tewari said he respected the judgment but argued it had triggered “new questions” among Bengal’s unemployed youth, who believe they were denied fair opportunities.
In a post on X, he accused the state of giving “institutional legitimacy to corruption” and insisted the battle would move to the Supreme Court.
Tewari maintained that the innocence of individual candidates cannot justify flawed appointments, asserting: “Humanity and justice are not the same thing. What about those who were deprived?”
Citing precedents including the Tripura teacher recruitment case and recent SSC-related rulings in Bengal, he reiterated that corruption-tainted appointments cannot legally survive.