Not Only Humanity? But Strong Legal Ground! What Actually Saved 32,000 Primary Teachers’ Jobs?

Primary Teachers Judgment: The final verdict delivered by Justice Tapabrata Chakraborty of the Calcutta High Court regarding the cancellation of jobs for 32,000 primary teachers has sparked intense discussion across the state. A common perception circulating on social media and in various circles is that the court saved the livelihoods of these teachers solely on “Humanitarian Grounds” or due to their long service of 9 years. While many believe sympathy was the core basis of this judgment, a deep dive into the verdict reveals a different story. Although there is a touch of humanity, the foundation of this historic judgment is built on solid legal arguments and the investigation report of the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI).

The Justice clarified in his judgment that this decision was not taken merely out of emotion. Instead, the facts emerging from the CBI investigation and legal precedents acted as a shield for the teachers in this case.

The Crucial Role of the CBI Report

The turning point of this case was essentially the investigation report submitted by the CBI. For a long time, there were allegations of massive corruption in this recruitment process and that recommendations were illegally made through external agencies. However, the CBI report revealed a different picture:

• Direct Role of the Board: The investigating agency stated that the recommendation letters were issued directly from the Primary Education Board itself. Appointment letters were issued based on these recommendations.
• Absence of Third Parties: The recruitment process was not completed through any third-party agency like S. Ray Basu Company, which was one of the main allegations raised by the opposition.
• No Proof of Massive Corruption: The CBI could not present any evidence indicating that every single one of the 32,000 candidates obtained their jobs through corrupt means. In other words, the theory of ‘Systematic Fraud’ or corruption across the entire system did not hold water here.

Identified Irregularities and Court Observations

The court unequivocally stated that it is not legally correct to cancel the entire recruitment panel for the irregularities of a few. The CBI investigation found irregularities in the cases of specific candidates, whose numbers are negligible compared to the total recruitment. Based on the information from the investigation, the court categorized the irregularities.

The identified irregularities are presented in the table below:

The Justice observed that since it was possible to segregate the specific ineligible candidates (264 and 96), it would be unfair to punish the good and eligible candidates. Apart from this specific number of candidates, no direct evidence of corruption was found in the recruitment of the rest.

Humanity vs. Legal Logic: What is the Real Truth?

The public perception that the court was lenient solely because of the 9-year service period is only partially true. The judgment noted that these teachers were appointed in February 2017, while the identified irregularities occurred in November of the same year. Thus, chronologically, the two events are distinct.

During their service life, no questions were raised regarding the integrity or efficiency of these teachers over the last decade. The CBI also could not provide specific evidence of influencing examiners or paying bribes at the interview board. Getting good marks in the interview or aptitude test despite having a low academic score is not unusual. Therefore, the entire recruitment process cannot be termed tainted merely by showing differences in marks.

In conclusion, while humanity certainly played a part in the judge’s mind, especially considering the long service and the families of the teachers, it served as a supplement to legal reasoning. The core verdict stands on the legal success of the CBI report failing to prove ‘Systematic Fraud’ and the ability to identify the ineligible candidates specifically.