Appointments made under the supervision of a court-appointed committee and approved by the Supreme Court cannot be terminated on the grounds of qualification verification unless specifically permitted by the Supreme Court.

ORAL ORDER

2 05-02-2026 Despite approval having been given to the report of Hon’ble Justice Chattopadhyay Committee formed under the orders of Hon’ble Apex Court and the list of appointees, having been approved by the Hon’ble Apex Court, wherein the appointments were not to be disturbed, still the District Education Officer, Supaul is said to have terminated the service of the petitioner in the year 2012.

2. After termination of the teachers similarly situated, the Hon’ble Division Bench had the occasion to adjudicate such issues by passing an order dated 28.03.2023 passed in LPA No. 1254 of 2016 and the Hon’ble Division Bench has made such observation, which is extracted herein below:-

“16. We are of the definite opinion that in the present case where all the party respondents were appointed as per the directions of the Hon'ble Supreme Court under the supervision of Justice Chattopadhyay, cannot be terminated on grounds of qualifications not having been properly verified; unless otherwise permitted by the Hon'ble Supreme Court. The party respondents were appointed after their eligibility being settled by Justice Chattopadhyay, appointed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court, to oversee the selection and appointed of teachers to the vacant posts, identified as available, as per the undertaking made by the State before the Hon'ble Supreme Court. Though the verification of credentials and qualifications of the candidates were directed to be done, there could be no such verification at this late stage. As noticed by the learned Single Judge in the impugned judgment the State ought to have been more vigilant when the appointments were carried out.”

3. The petitioner, who is before this Court, is one of such appointees whose appointment was interfered in the name of verification of certificate, which was impermissible to the district authorities but still, going beyond the jurisdiction, the termination of this petitioner was passed, which order was required to have been recalled in the light of the observation made by the Hon’ble Division Bench but, for the reasons best known to the district authorities, such orders have not been passed, coercing this petitioner to file the instant writ petition.

4. This Court prima facie finds that the authorities of the district are in direct contempt of the order passed by the Hon’ble Division Bench in LPA No. 1254 of 2016.

5. As a matter of last chance, the authorities are extended two weeks’ time to take corrective measures, failing which the Court would be constrained to pass appropriate order against the authority, who was supposed to take such decisions after the order passed by the Hon’ble Division Bench in LPA No. 1254 of 2016.

6. Post this case for further consideration on 24.02.2026.