TT Epaper
The Telegraph
Graphiti
 
CIMA Gallary

Rule-flout heat on SSC

The high court on Wednesday issued contempt rules against the school service commission chairman and the chiefs of the panel’s five zones and asked them to appear in person if they failed to carry out an earlier order within six weeks.

Justice Ashok Dasadhikari had on December 13 asked the commission to scan the documents of 77 candidates who had cracked the Teacher’s Eligibility Test in 2011 and recruit them within three months if they were found eligible.

The candidates had moved the court saying they had not yet been appointed though their names figured on the combined merit list.

The combined list comprises the names of all candidates; the commission draws up lists according to subjects and categories (SC, ST and OBC) from the combined list depending on vacancies.

The judge had ruled that if any candidate was found ineligible, the commission had to explain to him or her “why he or she is not eligible”.

Appearing for the candidates, advocate Subrata Mukhopadhyay submitted on Wednesday that the commission was yet to implement the December 13 order. “The court should issue contempt rules against the respondents for not carrying out its order yet.”

Advocate Abhijit Ganguly, appearing for the commission, submitted that his client had moved a division bench of the high court against the December order. But when the judge learnt that the appeal had been moved more than three months after he had passed the order, he said: “Your clients have to either carry out the order within six weeks or appear before the court and explain why contempt proceedings would not be drawn against them.”

An appeal against a court order has to be filed within a month of the order being issued. For a late appeal, the applicant must provide reasons for the delay. The court will decide whether such an appeal should at all be heard.

A commission official told Metro: “If there are 100 seats, we publish a list of 150 candidates. If the first 100 candidates accept the job offers, the rest cannot be appointed. The 77 candidates who had moved the court are from the pool of back-up candidates,” said the official.