LI Network
Published on: November 18, 2023 at 00:55 IST
The Calcutta High Court recently addressed the alarming stagnation in employment opportunities within the country, attributing it to the absence of effective mechanisms for job creation.
The observation was made by Justice Shekhar B Saraf, presiding over a batch of Writ Petitions related to a vacant clerk’s position (1 post) and two laboratory attendant positions dating back to 2009.
The petitioners sought appointment and urged the West Bengal School Service Commission (WBSSC) to initiate a fresh recruitment process in accordance with the West Bengal School Service Commission (Selection of Persons for Appointment to the Post of Non-teaching Staff) Rules, 2009.
The Writ Petitions contested a memorandum issued by the Additional District Inspector (ADI) of Schools in Purba Medinapur in July and October 2020.
The petitioners argued against the dissolution of panels for filling vacancies in two schools. They claimed that the schools had informed the District Inspector (DI) of Schools about the postponement of interviews, but the DI neither approved nor rejected the proposal, leading to the issuance of memoranda dissolving the panels by the ADI.
Expressing dissatisfaction, the petitioners approached the Court, asserting their right to appointment, being the initial individuals empanelled in the respective panels.
Addressing the case’s merits, the Court noted, “In the current case, a single vacancy of clerk and two vacancies for Laboratory Attendant has been vacant, and litigation against it has continued since 2009. Rather than employing combined efforts to ensure the position is filled up, what has ensured is years of legal disputes.”
In the concluding remarks of the judgment, the Court expressed concern over the frustration among individuals with the system, leading many to cease active job searching.
The Court pointed out that youth unemployment has reached an all-time high due to institutions creating obstacles and misusing discretionary power, hindering job seekers instead of encouraging them.
The Court emphasized that the petitioners do not have a vested right of selection or the right to be considered for appointment, denying any relief in the form of appointment.
It further urged institutions to apply recruitment rules judiciously to avoid becoming instruments of public mischief for the prosperity of the nation.
Case Title: Arnab Roy v. State of West Bengal & Ors. & connected matter
