An advocate has served a legal notice on chief minister Mamata Banerjee alleging contempt of the Supreme Court’s order invalidating over 25,000 school jobs in Bengal.

Advocate Siddharth Dutta has said the notice was sent on behalf of an NGO named Aatmadeep based in Nabanagar, North 24-Parganas.

Referring to the Supreme Court judgment, the notice says: “It is but obvious that everyone concerned with the judgment is duty-bound to comply with and implement the judgment passed by the Honble Supreme Court of India, dated 03.04.2025. The implementation of the said judgment shall require adherence by all concerned state and other authorities, who are duty-bound to cancel all illegal appointments made by implementing the judgment dated 03.04.2025... each authority is under unequivocal obligation to implement and carry out the judgment.”

The notice accuses Mamata of “complete disregard” of the Supreme Court when she told a meeting with the dismissed school staff: “Who has the right to take anyone’s job? No one.... you can put me in jail for saying this. But I don’t care.

“To destroy the education system, and to tear it down, there is a conspiracy going on. Planning is going on.... They have achieved good results in their life. You are calling all of them thieves. You are calling all of them ineligible. Who has given you right to say so? I am openly challenging...”

The notice asks the chief minister not to make any statement in public creating hope in the minds of people that the apex court order will not be implemented and to issue an unconditional apology.

Trinamool Congress leader Kunal Ghosh reacted to the legal notice and said it was “a deliberate attempt to derail the chief minister’s attempt to protect the jobs of the affected persons by unnecessarily creating a legal entangle. This is our appeal to the candidates to keep an eye on this conspiracy. They are trying to delay this process”.

“The chief minister has full faith in the judiciary and the court and the judges. However, if any judgment is against a large section of the people, and if someone wants to oppose it by raising a demand to reconsider the judgment, that does not amount to contempt of court,” Ghosh said.