The Supreme Court today cancelled a Calcutta High Court order that had directed the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) to probe the West Bengal Government’s creation of supernumerary posts during the ongoing legal challenge to the 2016 teacher recruitment scam.

While the apex court recently upheld the cancellation of nearly 25,000 appointments made by the West Bengal School Service Commission (WBSSC), it clarified that the issue of a CBI probe into supernumerary posts would be heard separately. That hearing was concluded today.

What Are Supernumerary Posts?

Supernumerary posts are temporary or additional roles created to accommodate individuals who may be eligible for a regular position but cannot be placed in one due to unavailability. In this case, it was alleged that these posts were used to “adjust” people who were illegally appointed.

Background of the Case

In 2022, while a case challenging the 2016 WBSSC appointments was still pending in court, the West Bengal Government passed a cabinet decision—approved by the Governor—on May 19, 2022, to create supernumerary posts. The Calcutta High Court later referred this cabinet decision to the CBI for investigation.

However, today, the Supreme Court set aside that directive, saying the High Court’s decision to involve the CBI was not legally justified.

The Supreme Court bench, led by Chief Justice DY Chandrachud and Justice Sanjay Kumar, gave several reasons for overturning the High Court’s directive:

The Court pointed out that in the original petition before the High Court, there was no direct challenge to the cabinet’s decision or the related government order. Also, there was no request for a CBI probe specifically into that cabinet order.

A government note dated May 5, 2022, had stated that any action on the wait-listed candidates would be subject to the outcome of the court proceedings. At that point, it was not even clear which candidates were “tainted.”

The Court cited Articles 74(2) and 163(3) of the Constitution, which state that any advice given by ministers to the President or Governor cannot be questioned in court. It ruled that the cabinet’s decision to create supernumerary posts is protected under these constitutional provisions.

“The High Court was not justified in referring the issue of creation of supernumerary posts to CBI,” the Court concluded.

Clarification

The Supreme Court made it clear that this decision only relates to the issue of supernumerary posts. The larger investigation into the 2016 Teachers’ Recruitment Scam by the CBI will continue as planned, including existing chargesheets and ongoing probes.

“Our observations are limited to the extent of the direction to investigate the creation of supernumerary posts,” the Court said.

Arguments From Both Sides

Senior Advocate Kapil Sibal, representing the West Bengal Government, stated that no appointments had been made from the wait-listed candidates after the cabinet decision.

However, the original petitioners argued that the supernumerary posts were created only to protect the illegal appointees and caused more vacancies in the system.

Senior Advocate Maninder Singh, appearing for one of the respondents, contended that if the cabinet’s decision was rooted in illegality, it would be a misuse of power. He argued that in such cases, constitutional protection should not apply.

Despite these arguments, the Supreme Court held firm on its view and ruled against the CBI investigation into this specific issue.