The Supreme Court has provided a final opportunity for filing responses to the petitions challenging a Calcutta High Court order invalidating the appointments of 25,753 teachers and non-teaching staff in government and aided schools in West Bengal. One from the West Bengal government is among the petitions contesting the high court's decision.
According to PTI, the Supreme Court, which is currently considering 33 petitions related to the high court's April 22 judgment, has scheduled these for a final hearing in three weeks.
Initially, a bench composed of Chief Justice of India (CJI) DY Chandrachud, Justice JB Pardiwala, and Justice Manoj Misra was notified that many parties had not yet filed their response affidavits. This includes the West Bengal government, which has not submitted its replies in cases where it is named as a respondent.
The Chief Justice expressed that the court would grant one last opportunity for the respondents to file their affidavits. He emphasized that if any respondents wish to file their counter affidavits, they must do so within the next two weeks. Failure to submit these documents within the given timeframe would result in the forfeiture of their right to file.
Additionally, the bench issued several procedural directives and appointed four lawyers as nodal counsel. These lawyers are tasked with compiling a shared electronic document after gathering details from the lawyers of various parties. The appointed nodal counsel is Astha Sharma, who represents the state government, Shalini Kaul, Partha Chatterjee, and Shekhar Kumar, as reported by PTI.
Chief Justice Chandrachud highlighted the necessity of this organisational exercise, noting that drafting the judgment would be an unmanageable task without it. During the hearing, one lawyer requested the bench to instruct the CBI to submit a status report on its ongoing investigation.
On May 7, the Supreme Court provided significant relief to the West Bengal teachers and non-teaching staff whose appointments were invalidated by the high court due to irregularities in the hiring process. However, it allowed the CBI to continue its investigation, which could extend to state cabinet members if necessary.
While granting this relief, the bench instructed the CBI to refrain from taking any immediate or precipitative actions, such as arrests, during its investigation.
