Calcutta High Court Sets Aside Cancellation of 32,000 Primary Teacher Appointments, Upholds Service Continuity

Court holds lack of pleadings, procedural irregularities and absence of direct evidence of corruption against appointed teachers; directs dismissal of writ petition challenging 2016 recruitment process

In a landmark judgment dated December 3, 2025, a Division Bench of the Calcutta High Court, presided over by Justices Tapabrata Chakraborty and Reetobroto Kumar Mitra, overturned a controversial single-judge order that had cancelled the appointments of approximately 32,000 primary school teachers appointed by the West Bengal Board of Primary Education (WBBPE) in 2016. The decision followed extensive hearings on a writ petition filed in 2022 by a group of 140 unsuccessful candidates alleging irregularities and corruption in the recruitment process.

The original single-judge ruling in May 2023 had directed cancellation of appointments on grounds including absence of an aptitude test, lack of formal engagement of interviewers, and alleged systemic corruption. It also mandated a fresh recruitment exercise within three months and temporary employment of the affected teachers at reduced remuneration. The 2023 judgment was widely criticized for its sweeping cancellation without impleading the appointed teachers, many of whom had served uninterruptedly for about eight years.

The High Court’s Division Bench, after hearing numerous appeals and applications from the Board, appointed teachers, and affected candidates, conducted a detailed and nuanced examination of the facts, pleadings, and relevant legal principles. The Court highlighted that:

• - The writ petition did not seek cancellation of appointments; rather, it sought inclusion of unsuccessful candidates in existing vacancies. The drastic relief granted was beyond pleadings and violated fundamental principles of natural justice by not impleading or hearing the appointed teachers.

• - Allegations of corruption and malpractices lacked specific pleadings and concrete evidence. The judgment’s reliance on statements from a minuscule number of interviewed candidates and interviewers-representing only a fraction of thousands involved-was deemed a flawed “roving enquiry” and impermissible.

• - The Board had conducted the recruitment in accordance with the West Bengal Primary School Teachers Recruitment Rules, 2016 (RR, 2016). Interview and aptitude tests were held, panels were prepared district-wise, and appointments followed due process. The Court noted the absence of evidence linking any appointed teacher to corrupt practices or monetary transactions.

• - The alleged procedural irregularities, such as non-publication of panels in the public domain, had been dealt with in earlier writ petitions where panels were annexed and the petitions dismissed. Delay and laches in challenging appointments made years ago were emphasized as critical factors against the writ petitioners.

• - The cancellation would gravely affect the fundamental right to livelihood of thousands of teachers who had completed mandatory training and served diligently. The Court stressed that equity and settled rights must be protected, especially given the long service rendered.

• - The High Court rejected the notion of the Court acting as a prosecutor or inquisitor, cautioning against judicial overreach and emphasizing the adversarial nature of the litigation.

The Court set aside the single-judge judgment, dismissed the writ petition, and restored the appointments of all the primary teachers appointed under the 2016 recruitment exercise. It also declined to interfere with the ongoing criminal investigations by CBI and Enforcement Directorate, noting that such proceedings alone do not justify termination of service without proof beyond reasonable doubt.

This judgment reaffirms the principles that courts must not grant relief beyond pleadings, exercise judicial review with caution in service matters, and protect vested rights acquired through prolonged service unless there is compelling evidence of mala fide or fraud. It also underscores the need for administrative transparency and strict adherence to recruitment rules to maintain public confidence.

The Calcutta High Court’s decision brings relief and stability to thousands of primary teachers across West Bengal and sets an important precedent on the limits of judicial intervention in public employment disputes.

Bottom Line:

Cancellation of appointment of 32,000 primary teachers appointed through 2016 recruitment process set aside where no pleadings or evidence established systemic corruption or illegality affecting the appointees.

Statutory provision(s): West Bengal Primary School Teachers Recruitment Rules, 2016, Section 165 of Indian Evidence Act 1872, Section 311 CrPC, Right of Children to Free and Compulsory Education Act, 2009, Article 14 of the Constitution of India

West Bengal Board of Primary Education v. Priyanka Naskar, (Calcutta)(DB) : Law Finder Doc Id # 2817306