The Supreme Court on Monday stayed a Calcutta High Court judgment directing the Bengal government to call 2016 waitlisted candidates for interviews in the fresh teachers’ recruitment process, despite many having crossed the age limit of 40 years.
A bench of Justice Sanjay Kumar and Justice Vinod Chandran stayed the high court order following an appeal filed by the West Bengal School Service Commission (SSC).
The commission challenged the high court verdict on the grounds that it violated statutory rules as well as last year’s Supreme Court judgment that terminated the jobs of 24,000-odd teachers and non-teaching staff of government-aided schools.
Senior advocate Kalyan Banerjee represented the commission, while the appeal was filed through advocate Preetika Dwivedi.
In the appeal, the commission argued that “Candidates who were waitlisted or were not selected in the 2016 recruitment process have no vested right to participate in the
2025 selection process with age relaxation. The 2025 Rules were framed in exercise of the legislative powers of the State.”
“The High Court does not have powers under Article 142 of the Constitution of India and cannot direct that the selection process be conducted in violation of the Rules. The High Court may decide on the constitutional validity of the 2025 Rules; however, no mandamus can be issued to act in violation of Statutory Rules,” the commission’s appeal stated.
The commission also contended that the high court had erroneously treated unsuccessful 2016 candidates as untainted, even though the Supreme Court’s April 3, 2025 judgment had distinguished only selected candidates as tainted or untainted.
“The said directions are therefore bad in law and deserve to be set aside,” the SSC appeal stated.
According to the commission, the notification for the fresh recruitment process was issued on May 30, 2025, more than six months before one of the candidates filed a writ petition.
The commission argued that the high court’s order directing inclusion of waitlisted or unsuccessful 2016 candidates in interviews and lecture demonstrations is contrary to the April 3, 2025 Supreme Court judgment in State of West Bengal v. Baisakhi Bhattacharyya (CA 4800 of 2025) and the July 16, 2025 division bench judgment in Arunima Paul v. State of West Bengal (MAT 1017 of 2025), as well as the 2025 Rules.
“The observation (in the high court order) would compel the petitioner to grant age relaxation to candidates who were never selected or appointed in the 2016 process and who are not beneficiaries of the April 3, 2025 judgment,” the commission said.