In a pivotal ruling concerning the recruitment of primary teachers in Manipur, the Supreme Court emphasized that authorities must preserve candidates’ answer scripts until the completion of the selection process to prevent accusations of wrongdoing. The Court stressed that safeguarding these documents throughout the entire recruitment phase is not just prudent but essential to maintain transparency and accountability.
The Supreme Court bench, comprising Justices Hrishikesh Roy, Sudhanshu Dhulia, and SVN Bhatti, was reviewing a case rooted in a 2015 Manipur High Court judgment. The case involved the recruitment of 1,423 primary teachers that began as far back as 2006, a process marred by alleged irregularities after a local newspaper prematurely published results.
After a thorough review, the Supreme Court ordered the creation of a revised select list based solely on merit. This list must include all candidates who participated in the recruitment process, even those who had not previously contested their appointments. The Court ruled that denying these candidates the opportunity for reconsideration would violate principles of equality under the Constitution.
The issue arose after some candidates challenged the recruitment process, claiming that the selection was tainted when the newspaper released names prior to the official results. Despite these claims, the High Court had dismissed allegations of foul play, citing the destruction of the answer scripts due to space constraints.
As part of its directive, the Supreme Court has allowed for parity among all similarly situated candidates, noting that it would be unfair to exclude those who had not pursued legal action. The Court underscored the need to hear the “silent knocks” of deserving candidates who had been waiting for employment, some for over 13 years.
However, the Court also acknowledged the plight of teachers who had already been serving under temporary contracts since 2011. Recognizing the potential hardship these individuals could face, the decision to retain them or replace them with newly selected candidates was left to the discretion of the government.
Ultimately, the Court upheld the 2015 judgment of the Manipur High Court and instructed that appointments be made within four weeks following the publication of the revised select list. While the new appointees will not receive backdated salaries, they will be granted notional appointment benefits for the purposes of superannuation.