STATE OF WEST BENGAL versus BAISHAKHI BHATTACHARYYA (CHATTERJEE) AND OTHERS

Citation: [2025] 4 S.C.R. 2237 · Decided: 03-04-2025 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: SANJIV KHANNA · Disposal: Disposed off

cites 6 · see the full citation network in Lexace

Judgment (excerpt)

[2025] 4 S.C.R. 2237 : 2025 INSC 437
State of West Bengal 
v. 
Baishakhi Bhattacharyya (Chatterjee) and Others
(Civil Appeal No. 4800 of 2025) 
03 April 2025
[Sanjiv Khanna,* CJI and Sanjay Kumar, J.]
Issue for Consideration
The issues before the Hon’ble Supreme Court were:
I.	
Whether the recruitment process conducted by West 
Bengal School Service Commission in 2016 for appointment 
of Assistant Teachers (Classes IX–X and XI–XII) and  
non-teaching staff (Groups C and D) stood vitiated by systemic 
irregularities and fraud.
II.	
Whether the decision of the Hon’ble High Court to annul 
the entire selection is justifiable or whether only tainted 
appointments should be invalidated, preserving untainted 
selections.
Headnotes†
Constitution of India, Arts.14 & 16 – Recruitment – Cancellation 
of selection process – Scope of judicial review:
Held: The settled law on annulment of the entire process of 
recruitment is that it can be justified only when the irregularities 
are systemic and pervasive so as to undermine the sanctity of the 
entire process and it is not possible to segregate the untainted 
from the tainted – In Sachin Kumar v. DSSSB (2021) 4 SCC 631; 
which relied on Bihar School Examination Board v. Subhas Chandra 
Sinha (1970) 1 SCC 648; it was held that, when irregularities border 
on or even constitute fraud, it severely damages the credibility 
and legitimacy of the process – Where separation of tainted and 
untainted candidates is feasible, the innocent should not suffer 
for the wrongdoings of others – This principle flows from equality 
of opportunity under Article 16(1) and the guarantee of fairness 
under Article 14 – A constitution bench in Board of High School 
and Intermediate Education, U.P., Allahabad v. Ghanshyam Das 
* Author
2238
[2025] 4 S.C.R.
Supreme Court Reports
Gupta, AIR 1962 SC 1110; held that if widespread fraud and 
manipulation strike at the root of the process, and the system 
itself is found to be corrupt or compromised, then annulment of 
the entire recruitment becomes inevitable – In the present case, 
findings of the High Court, the CBI and the Enquiry Committee 
showed rank manipulation, illegal appointments, destruction of 
records, and deliberate cover-up – These facts revealed fraud of 
such magnitude that the process stood irreparably tainted – Hence, 
cancellation of the entire selection process was the only viable 
option. [Paras 7–19, 20–22]
Service Law – Recruitment to public posts – Natural justice – 
Requirement of notice and hearing:
Held: The general rule is that individual candidates should be 
afforded notice and opportunity of hearing before their appointments 
are disturbed – However, exceptions arise in cases of mass fraud 
or systemic irregularities where giving notice to thousands of 
candidates would be impractical and unnecessary – Bihar School 
Examination Board v. Subhas Chandra Sinha, (1970) 1 SCC 648; 
U.P. v. Ghanshyam Das Gupta, AIR 1962 SC 1110; Anamica 
Mishra  v. U.P. Public Service Commission, Allahabad, (1990) 
Supp. SCC 692), recognise that in such situations, en masse 
annulment is valid even without individual hearing – In the instant 
case, destruction of OMR sheets, illegal grant of appointments 
outside the panel, and manipulation of ranks were matters of 
record, leaving no scope for individual defence – It was therefore 
held that principles of natural justice did not require individual 
hearing when the entire process was shown to be fraudulent. 
[Paras 8–10, 19–20]
West Bengal School Service Commission Act, 1997; Rules, 
2009 & 2016 – Irregularities in recruitment:
Held: Investigation and committee reports conclusively revealed 
multiple violations of statutory provisions and recruitment rules – 
Appointment of scanning agency through a closed-door process 
contrary to Article 14 – Unauthorised sub-delegation of scanning 
work to a third party without approval – Destruction of original OMR 
sheets despite express prohibition under the 2009 Rules – Failure to 
publish merit lists with marks – Rank manipulation by altering order 
of candidates in the panel – Counselling and recommendations 
[2025] 4 S.C.R. 
2239
State of West Bengal v. 
Baishakhi Bhattacharyya (Chatterjee) and Others
beyond validity of panel – Appointments to persons outside panel, 
after expiry of panel, and even to candidates who had submitted 
blank OMR sheets – Creation of supernumerary posts to regularise 
illegal appointees – The cumulative effect of these irre

Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.