Calcutta High Court (Appellete Side)
Court No. 17 Ramesh Malik & Ors vs The State Of West Bengal & Ors on 13 June, 2022
Author: Abhijit Gangopadhyay
Bench: Abhijit Gangopadhyay
13. 06. 2022
BP WPA 7907 of 2019
Sl. 2
Court No. 17 Ramesh Malik & Ors.
Vs.
The State of West Bengal & Ors.
Mr. Bikash Ranjan Bhattacharya, Sr. Advocate
Mr. Sudipta Dasgupta
Mr. Bikram Banerjee
Mr. Arkadeb Biswas
Mr. Arka Nandi
Ms. Dipa Acharya
Mr. Sutirtha Nayek
..for the petitioners.
Mr. L.K. Gupta, Sr. Advocate
Mr. Ratul Biswas
..for the Board.
Mr. Sirsanya Bandyopadhyay
Mr. Arka Kumar Nag
..for the State.
1. The petitioners have alleged that some persons -
names and other particulars of whom have been given
in the writ application and in the supplementary
affidavit affirmed on 9th June, 2022 filed today before
this court - have been given appointment though they
have not qualified in TET, 2014. For getting a service in
a primary school as a teacher a candidate must have
passed in Teacher Eligibility Test (TET in short). The
petitioners have further alleged that 23 lacs candidates
appeared in TET, 2014 and one panel was published
for giving appointment of more or less 42,000
2
candidates as primary teachers. The petitioners have
expressed serious suspicion about the legality and
correctness of publication of such panel.
2. By filing the supplementary affidavit as aforesaid
it has been submitted that though the panel was
published in 2016 a further panel named - additional
panel - was published on 04.12.2017 and the
document annexed in the supplementary affidavit is
only in respect of the said additional panel District
Hooghly wherein not only one candidate Supriyo Sarkar
who was not a qualified candidate in TET was named in
the second panel and got appointment but also other
candidates totaling to 68 candidates in the district of
Hooghly have been given appointment by publishing
the second panel or the additional panel.
3. In reply to a question asked by this court, learned
advocate for the West Bengal Board of Primary
Education ('the Board', for short) has submitted that
though there is no provision in the relevant law for
publishing another panel but if situation arises and if it
is found necessary by the Board, it can publish a
second panel and such necessity was felt because of
demand of large number of candidates demonstrating
before the Board's office and the Board decided to send
the question and answers of TET, 2014 to some expert
and the expert found that one question and its answer
in TET, 2014 was wrong. Therefore, the Board decided
to give one mark to the agitating candidates who filed
applications for reconsideration of their marks in TET
3
2014 with their testimonials including their training
qualifications. This submission of training qualification
is also a doubtful question keeping in mind the other
TET qualified candidates.
It is an admitted position that there was no
public announcement either in the website of the
Board or in any newspaper that such application with
testimonials can be made to the Board and the Board
would consider such testimonials.
4. Therefore, I find that in the first place there was
no provision in the relevant law for publication of a
second panel and secondly the entire procedure for
accepting the testimonials of the persons who filed their
applications before the Board for reconsideration of
their TET, 2014 examination paper, is wholly illegal and
a surreptitious and clandestine exercise by the Board
as there was no public announcement for other
similarly situated candidates. There is no reply on the
part of the Board as to why other similarly situated
candidates were discriminated against in filing similar
applications?
5. Learned advocate for the Board has submitted
that after receiving such applications from the agitating
candidates only 269 candidates out of 23 lacs
candidates found eligible for getting one mark each in
TET, 2014 and such mark was given to them and thus
they qualified and were given appointment. As the
exercise of giving appointment in such a manner as
aforesaid which is wholly illegal for want of any public
4
notice wherefor other similarly situated candidates
could not file similar applications and the second panel
published in respect of every district (may be by similar
letter bearing memo no. 2884(40)/BPE/2017 dated
04.12.2017) is declared as wholly illegal and void ab
initio for want of any such provisions of publishing a
second panel these 269 candidates who have been
given appointment through the said illegal and void
second panel are to be immediately terminated by the
Board by issuing letters intimating that they shall cease
to be teachers of primary schools with immediate effect
and the concerned District Inspector of Schools
(Primary Education) shall not pay any salary to them
from tomorrow onwards. Those 269 candidates shall
not be allowed to enter into their respective school
premises from tomorrow and shall not interfere in any
manner whatsoever in running of the primary school
concerned. The salary they have received in the
meantime is to be refunded by them but for that
separate order will be passed at a subsequent stage.
6. Learned advocate for the petitioners has raised a
point that because of such illegalities and other
irregularities of the Board they have no faith upon the
West Bengal Board of Primary Education and they have
prayed that the result of the TET, 2014 was sent to
National Informatics Center ('NIC', for short) by the
Board is to be kept in fully secured manner and it shall
not be interfered or tampered with or altered in any
manner whatsoever.
5
I hold that if such prayer is allowed none of the
parties will be adversely affected and accordingly such
prayer is allowed and NIC is directed to keep the
database as referred above untouched and fully
secured.
I direct the petitioner to add NIC as a party
respondent in this proceeding in course of the day and
to communicate this order to them.
7. Though the police force of this city and of this State is competent enough to investigate such corruption and though I am satisfied about their capability I cannot give the responsibility of investigation of this corruption, prima facie case of which has been established, upon Kolkata Police or State Police as because they are controlled by some politically and otherwise influential persons and it is impossible for them to investigate the corruption in this matter in a fair and unbiased manner. This police force is under a department of the State government and as they do not have any free hand in the investigation of the corruption but their hands are tied by politically influenced persons of this State. I have to give the responsibility of investigation and interrogation of the related persons to such corrupt appointments to some other investigating agency and I decide to give this responsibility to Central Bureau of Investigation. Here the President of the West Bengal Board of Primary Education is an elected member of West Bengal Legislative Assembly who has returned from his constituency as a candidate of the political party which is the ruling party of this State.
6
8. In view of the illegality committed in respect of the second panel (termed as Additional Panel, by the Secretary of the Board), which is wholly illegal and giving illegal appointment to 269 candidates by a queer method unknown to law, I direct the Central Bureau of Investigation ('CBI', for short) to start investigation by registering a case immediately against the Board and start interrogating the President of the West Bengal Board of Primary Education, Dr. Manik Bhattacharya, and the Secretary of the said Board Dr. Ratna Chakraborty Bagchi, which shall start today itself. I direct the petitioners to add Dr. Manik Bhattacharya, the President of the West Bengal Board of Primary Education and Dr. Ratna Chakraborty Bagchi, the Secretary of the said Board as party respondents and they are to go to the CBI office at Nizam Palace by 5:30 p.m. today to face interrogation.
9. It is made clear that if they do not co-operate with CBI, CBI shall have every liberty to interrogate them after taking them into custody.
10. CBI shall contact NIC immediately to seize the database of the TET, 2014 candidates published by the West Bengal Board of Primary Education by tomorrow (14.06.2022) and to submit a short report in this court about the registration of the case, initiation of the interrogation of the two persons added today in this 7 proceeding (named above) and taking into custody of the database of the TET, 2014 candidates day after tomorrow at 2 p.m.
11. If CBI feels that in respect of this matter an independent case is not required to be registered apart from the other case involving the Board which has already been registered, as has been told by the petitioners, CBI need not register a new case.
12. I grant liberty to the petitioners to communicate this order immediately to the Joint Director of CBI having his office at Kolkata by email, over telephone and other modes of communication and I direct the learned advocate for the Board to communicate the President of the Board and the Secretary of the Board to present themselves before CBI by 5:30 p.m. today.
The matter is adjourned till 15th June, 2022 when it will be taken up at 2 p.m. (Abhijit Gangopadhyay, J. ) 8