New Delhi: The Supreme Court on Thursday allowed the "untainted" assistant teachers in West Bengal, whose appointments were cancelled due to large-scale irregularities in the 2016 selection process, to continue in their positions till fresh recruitment is completed.   

Stressing that students must not suffer, a bench headed by CJI Sanjiv Khanna extended the relief for only such class 9-12 teachers, whose names were not linked to any irregularity.

The CJI Khanna-led Bench asked the West Bengal School Service Commission (WBSSC) to issue fresh advertisements, latest by May 31 and complete the recruitment process by December 31 of this year.

The top court clarified that its order won’t benefit Group C and Group D employees and cautioned that if there is any delay in conducting the recruitment process, it will vacate its order in relation to class 9-12 assistant teachers.

Recently, the Supreme Court upheld the Calcutta HC order cancelling 25,753 appointments in teaching and non-teaching posts made by the West Bengal School Service Commission (WBSSC) in 2016.

In an order passed in April last year, the Calcutta High Court had nullified the appointment of 25,753 teaching and non-teaching jobs in state-run schools and asked the candidates selected from the expired panels to return the entire salary drawn during their tenures, along with an annualised interest of 12 per cent. The top court, last week, set aside the direction passed by the Calcutta High Court, which had ordered the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) to probe the creation of supernumerary posts in state-run schools. These teaching and non-teaching posts, which have remained under the cloud since the beginning, are perceived to provide room for ineligible candidates recruited illegally. With the decision of the apex court, the probe agency will not be able to investigate the sanctity of the decision approving the creation of supernumerary posts.

The SC clarified that its order will not preclude the CBI from probing other aspects of the school job scam case in terms of the Calcutta High Court decision. (IANS)