The West Bengal government has challenged a recent Calcutta High Court order that bars "tainted" candidates from participating in the fresh recruitment process for school teachers. The case revolves around the recruitment of teaching and non-teaching staff in state-run and aided schools.

Background The genesis of the issue lies in the annulment of appointments of nearly 26,000 teaching and non-teaching staff by the Supreme Court on April 17, 2025, which found the 2016 selection process to be tainted by irregularities. The Supreme Court directed a fresh recruitment process to fill the vacancies. In light of this, the West Bengal School Service Commission (WBSSC) initiated a fresh recruitment drive.

High Court Order On Monday, July 7, 2025, a single bench of the Calcutta High Court, presided over by Justice Saugata Bhattacharya, ordered the WBSSC to exclude "tainted" candidates from the fresh recruitment process. The court directed that if any such candidate had already applied, their application should be considered cancelled. The term "tainted" refers to candidates who secured jobs through corruption and fraudulent means. Justice Bhattacharya's order also instructed authorities to adhere strictly to the timeline set by the Supreme Court for completing the selection process. The High Court has directed that the recruitment process should be completed by December 31, 2025.

Government's Appeal The West Bengal government, along with the WBSSC, has now challenged this order, seeking to allow all candidates, including those previously identified as "tainted," to participate in the fresh recruitment process. A division bench of Justices Soumen Sen and Smita Das De of the Calcutta High Court granted permission to the state government and the WBSSC to file their appeal. Lawyers representing the state and the SSC requested an early hearing of the matter.

Arguments Presented The state government has argued that disallowing "tainted" candidates from re-taking the Teacher Eligibility Test (TET) would amount to double punishment, as they have already lost their jobs and salaries following the Supreme Court's order. Senior Advocate Kalyan Bandopadhyay, representing the WBSSC, contended that the Supreme Court's order did not explicitly bar "tainted" candidates from applying for the new selection process and that ignoring their experience would be unfair.

Petitioners' Arguments Those challenging the inclusion of "tainted" candidates argue that the fresh recruitment process should provide a level playing field for all eligible candidates. They contend that allowing candidates whose previous appointments were tainted by corruption to benefit from new weightage criteria, such as prior teaching experience, would be unjust.

Implications The outcome of this legal challenge has significant implications for the ongoing teacher recruitment process in West Bengal. The court's decision will determine whether candidates implicated in the earlier recruitment scam will have a second chance at securing teaching positions. The case also raises important questions about fairness, justice, and the integrity of the recruitment process.