HC stays state relief for Group-C & D jobless school staff
Times of India | 21 June 2025
Kolkata: Calcutta High Court on Friday stayed till Sept 26 the state's interim relief for Group C and Group D employees of state-run schools who lost their jobs following a Supreme Court order on April 3.The state had announced a monthly interim relief of Rs 25,000 for Group C employees and Rs 20,000 for Group D employees. Another section of candidates, who were wait-listed, moved the HC praying for a stay on the state scheme as it "frustrated" the SC order.Justice Amrita Sinha held that people whose jobs were terminated by the SC order could not be provided such a support after the apex court had decided the issue of illegal appointments conclusively and opined that the appointments were a result of "fraud". Getting refund of the money already disbursed to the beneficiaries would be a problem if the state scheme was found to be in violation of law after the final hearing, she reasoned.The court also took note of the fact that the state welfare scheme was announced for a particular group who would not be doing any work for the state. "Paying persons gratuitously, who are not serving the state but are either sitting at home or are engaged elsewhere, does not appeal to the court," Justice Sinha held, adding that the state had applied a "pick and choose" method for determining the beneficiaries of the welfare scheme."There are two sets of candidates. One set comprises appointed candidates whose jobs were terminated and the other set comprises the wait-listed candidates. Both sets are jobless now," Justice Sinha said, holding that the state scheme for a particular group "intended to provide succour to the tainted terminated candidates".Justice Sinha acknowledged the state's legislative competence to formulate a welfare scheme but held that such a scheme should be applied equally. "Whether it is proper for the state to create a class of favoured candidates out of a bigger class of unemployed candidates is a matter to be decided after hearing (all) parties," she said.The court did not buy the state's argument that the petitioners should not have approached the HC when a review petition by the state was pending before the SC. It recalled that the state had proceeded to publish the scheme when its own review petition was pending before the apex court.Justice Sinha directed the petitioners to file affidavits within four weeks and the state to file an affidavit in reply within a fortnight after that before the petition would come up for hearing next.