32000 Primary Teacher Recruitment Case: The hearing of the 32,000 primary teacher recruitment case is ongoing at the Calcutta High Court. Today, the hearing was held in the division bench of Hon’ble Justice Tapabrata Chakraborty and Justice Ritabrata Kumar Mitra. On the tenth day of the case, the petitioner’s lawyer, Abhratosh Majumdar, raised several important questions, which have given rise to new thoughts about the transparency of this recruitment process.
Discrepancies Regarding the Aptitude Test
At the beginning of the hearing, advocate Majumdar raised the issue of the aptitude test. He stated that many candidates were rejected during the verification process and could not even reach the interview stage. Information regarding the aptitude test and interview from various districts like Hooghly, Howrah, Uttar Dinajpur, Murshidabad, and Cooch Behar has been submitted to the court in a sealed envelope.
Citing an incident from Howrah, he said that a candidate named Salim Ali was not allowed to participate in the interview due to an error in the verification process.
The Question of “Res Judicata” and Trained Candidates
The court also discussed “res judicata,” or the verdict of a previous case on the same matter. The lawyer informed that 21 candidates in the current case had previously filed similar petitions, which were dismissed.
Issues of violation of the reservation policy and publication of the panel were raised there. However, regarding the trained candidates, the lawyer said that no trained candidate has approached the court. Therefore, the court will not interfere further in this matter.
Transparency of Panel Publication
Questions were also raised about the publication of the panel. Advocate Majumdar stated that according to the 2016 recruitment rules, the panel was published at the District Primary School Council (DPSC) office in each district.
It was the responsibility of the DPSC chairpersons to publish the panels at their respective offices. However, the court termed this process a “fake process” and expressed doubts about its transparency.
Court’s Observation and Next Steps
During the hearing, the judge appeared thoughtful several times and raised questions about the trained candidates and the publication of the panel. Advocate Majumdar duly answered all the court’s questions. The issue of “res judicata,” which had not come to the notice of a single judge before, emerged as an important point in favor of the teachers.
The hearing of this case will continue tomorrow, and it is expected that the court will play an important role in unraveling the complexities of this recruitment process.
