The Supreme Court on Monday dismissed a special leave petition challenging Calcutta High Court’s decision to allow Bengal’s new teacher recruitment rules, clearing the way for the state to proceed with fresh hiring under guidelines formulated in May 2025.
A bench comprising Justice Sanjay Kumar and Justice Satish Chandra Sharma found no grounds to interfere with the high court’s judgment. The state was represented by senior advocate Kapil Sibal and standing counsel Kunal Mimani, while the petitioners were led by senior advocate Bikash Ranjan Bhattacharyya.
However, the judgment had not been uploaded till late Monday evening.
On April 3, the Supreme Court terminated over 25,000 teaching and non-teaching staff recruited by the Bengal government in 2016. The apex court observed that the “entire selection process has been vitiated and tainted beyond resolution” due to “manipulations and frauds on a large scale, coupled with the attempted cover-up”.
Of those affected, 15,403 teachers were dismissed in April but allowed to continue working until December 31, 2025, while the state conducts fresh recruitment by the same deadline.
The rules dispute
The current legal battle centred on which recruitment rules should govern the fresh hiring process. Aggrieved candidates wanted the state to use the 2016 guidelines, but the West Bengal School Service Commission opted for new rules approved in May 2025.
The new framework has drawn criticism for allowing in-service teachers to earn up to 20 additional marks — 10 each for teaching experience and lecture demonstration — which opponents argue creates an unfair advantage for certain candidates.
High court’s rationale
The Calcutta High Court’s division bench of Justice Soumen Sen and Justice Smita Das De ruled on July 16 that the Supreme Court’s April order mandating fresh recruitment did not specify which rules to follow.
“All the orders relating to the issue have directed fresh recruitment to be carried out without any specific reference to the Recruitment Rules 2016,” the court noted.
Defending the new criteria, the high court emphasised that policy decisions regarding recruitment — including consideration of teaching experience and age limits — fall within the government’s domain.
The bench argued that the 2025 rules were designed to select the best candidates to ensure quality education as guaranteed under Article 21-A of the Constitution.