Live
- Gold rates in Vijayawada today surges, check the rates on 27 November, 2024
- Need Project Certificate for rehabilitation of forest dwellers
- How higher education is opening doors to employment success
- PM Modi greets Minister Pralhad Joshi on his birthday
- Tirupati: Take up repairs of damaged roads, officials told
- Pawan Kalyan meets Vice President Jagdeep Dhankar, Continues Delhi Visit
- Heavy rain alert for Tirupati district due to low pressure
- EPACK Prefab constructs India’s fastest-built structure in 150 hrs
- Woman and her kids die under suspicious circumstances
- BMTC to increase bus running time on each route to drivers and conductors
Another loophole in primary teachers’ recruitment surfaces in Calcutta High Court
Calcutta High Court
Another loophole in the recruitment of primary teachers in state-run schools in West Bengal has surfaced with the West Bengal Board of Primary Education (WBBPE) admitting in the Calcutta High Court on Tuesday
Kolkata: Another loophole in the recruitment of primary teachers in state-run schools in West Bengal has surfaced with the West Bengal Board of Primary Education (WBBPE) admitting in the Calcutta High Court on Tuesday that no 'additional panel' was created for recruitment of primary teachers in 2016.
In 2016, as many as 42,000 candidates cleared the recruitment examination for primary teachers in West Bengal. As per norms, the board was supposed to create an additional panel, which is somewhat similar to a 'second list’ in any competitive examination.
Those securing positions in the 'main panel' like the 'first list' opt out, and the vacant positions are filled by the best eligible candidates from the 'additional panel'.
After a detailed hearing, the single-judge bench of Justice Amrita Sinha directed the board to submit an affidavit on the matter by August 20.
The court was hearing a petition filed by a candidate who appeared for the recruitment examination in 2016. Since his name was not on the main panel, he moved the Calcutta High Court seeking publication of the list of the additional panel.
The board's counsel, however, informed the court that since no additional panel was created in 2016, there was no possibility of publishing the same.
The counsel for the petitioner claimed that since the recruitment in 2016 was not made strictly on the basis of merit, the board refrained from creating the additional panel.
