Bengal School Job Fiasco: Joint Platform Calls for 'March to Secretariat' on 21 April

AGENCIES | KOLKATA, 5 APRIL 2025 : A joint platform comprising both 'genuine' teaching and non-teaching staff who lost their jobs following the recent Supreme Court verdict, and candidates who were denied jobs illegally to accommodate those who paid bribes, has announced plans to organise a "March to the State Secretariat" on 21 April, unless the West Bengal government takes concrete steps to address the issues affecting both groups.

At a hastily convened press conference on Saturday afternoon, leaders of the joint platform—named Chhakraprarthi O Chakrahara Oikya Mancha (Joint Platform of Jobseekers and Job-losers)—stated they are seeking an appointment with Chief Minister Mamata Banerjee by 15 April, which coincides with Bengali New Year’s Day, to discuss the crisis stemming from the Supreme Court ruling.

“If we do not get confirmation of a meeting with the Chief Minister by that date, we will go ahead with our planned 'March to the Secretariat' rally on 21 April,” a platform leader said.

“We do not want empty promises anymore. At the proposed meeting, we would like to discuss with the state government what can be done to address the emerging uncertainties in this matter.”

It remains unclear whether the platform has any political affiliation or backing. Their primary grievance lies in the uncertainty faced by both ‘genuine jobholders’ and ‘deprived candidates’, due to the West Bengal School Service Commission’s (WBSSC) failure to distinguish those who secured jobs via bribery from those rightfully appointed.

On Thursday, the Supreme Court’s division bench, comprising Chief Justice of India Sanjiv Khanna and Justice Sanjay Kumar, upheld an earlier order of the Calcutta High Court division bench of Justice Debangsu Basak and Justice Shabbar Rashidi, which cancelled 25,753 appointments made by WBSSC through its 2016 panel.

The apex court also agreed with the High Court’s observation that the entire panel had to be scrapped, as neither the commission nor the state government could differentiate between legitimate and tainted appointments.