WBSSC scam: Job losing staff's protest march to state secretariat today
This section of the non-teaching staff, united under the banner of "Group-C & Group-D Adhikar Mancha (Group-C & Group-D Rights Forum)", will conduct a rally to press a four-point demand from the state government in resolving the ongoing impasse.
The forum has calculated that of the total non-teaching jobs cancelled following the Supreme Court order in April this year, a total of 3,395 were "untainted" and hence should be reinstated, while the jobs of the identified "tainted" ones should be terminated immediately.
Their second demand is the immediate publication of certified copies of the "untainted" non-teaching staff by the West Bengal School Service Commission (WBSSC).
Their third demand is the immediate publication of all the optical mark recognition (OMR) recognition sheets used in the written examination for recruitment, so that it becomes clear who was "tainted".
The fourth and final demand is that the state government should work out some alternatives for the time being but only for the "untainted" ones and excluding the "tainted" ones.
The untainted staff will start assembling in front of Howrah Maidan Metro station in Kolkata-adjacent Howrah district from 11.30 a.m. on Tuesday onwards and thereafter march toward the state secretariat, Nabanna located at Mandirtala, also in Howrah district.
Initially, they decided to conduct the rally on July 3. However, being denied police permission to conduct the rally on that day, they finalised Tuesday as the date for the protest programme.
"We had several rounds of meetings with WBSSC on the matter. However, the latter was unable to come out with any specific solution. So ultimately we were forced to give this protest call," said a representative for the forum.
Meanwhile, security arrangements in and around Nabanna have been tightened over this protest march.
A three-tier security system has already been raised around the state secretariat. All the roads connecting to Nabanna have been blocked with barricades.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Hindu
an hour ago
- The Hindu
U.S. Supreme Court clears way for Trump's plans to downsize federal workforce
The Supreme Court on Tuesday (July 8, 2025) cleared the way for President Donald Trump's plans to downsize the federal workforce despite warnings that critical government services will be lost and hundreds of thousands of federal employees will be out of their jobs. The Justices overrode lower court orders that temporarily froze the cuts, which have been led by the Department of Government Efficiency. The Court said in an unsigned order that no specific cuts were in front of the justices, only an executive order issued by Mr. Trump and an administration directive for agencies to undertake job reductions. Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson was the only dissenting vote, accusing her colleagues of a 'demonstrated enthusiasm for greenlighting this President's legally dubious actions in an emergency posture.' Mr. Trump has repeatedly said voters gave him a mandate to remake the federal government, and he tapped billionaire ally Elon Musk to lead the charge through DOGE. Mr. Musk recently left his role. Downsizing of federal workforce Tens of thousands of federal workers have been fired, have left their jobs via deferred resignation programs or have been placed on leave. There is no official figure for the job cuts, but at least 75,000 federal employees took deferred resignation and thousands of probationary workers have already been let go. In May, U.S. District Judge Susan Illston found that Trump's administration needs congressional approval to make sizable reductions to the federal workforce. By a 2-1 vote, a panel of the U.S. 9th Circuit Court of Appeals refused to block Illston's order, finding that the downsizing could have broader effects, including on the nation's food-safety system and health care for veterans. Illston directed numerous federal agencies to halt acting on the President's workforce executive order signed in February and a subsequent memo issued by DOGE and the Office of Personnel Management. Illston was nominated by former Democratic President Bill Clinton. The labor unions and nonprofit groups that sued over the downsizing offered the justices several examples of what would happen if it were allowed to take effect, including cuts of 40% to 50% at several agencies. Among the agencies affected by the order are the departments of Agriculture, Energy, Labour, the Interior, State, the Treasury and Veterans Affairs. It also applies to the National Science Foundation, Small Business Association, Social Security Administration and Environmental Protection Agency.
The Hindu
2 hours ago
- The Hindu
The ECI does not have unfettered powers
The Election Commission of India (ECI) ordered a Special Intensive Revision (SIR) of the electoral rolls in Bihar, which will be facing Assembly elections in November. Political parties in the Opposition have alleged that the SIR is aimed at disenfranchising thousands of voters in Bihar by disqualifying them on the ground that they are not citizens of India. The ECI has denied this allegation and justified the revision. In the meantime, many petitions have been filed in the Supreme Court challenging the ECI's order. While the controversy centres on the motive behind this exercise being conducted just a couple of months before elections, especially when electoral rolls were revised in 2024, this article focuses on the legality of this exercise and the powers of the ECI to undertake it. Reasons for disqualification Article 326 of the Constitution declares that elections to the Lok Sabha and the Assemblies shall be held on the basis of adult suffrage. This means every adult person is entitled to be a voter provided they are not disqualified on certain specified grounds. There are two essential qualifications of being an elector under this Article: the person should be citizen of India and should be aged not less than 18. The Representation of the People Act (RPA), 1950, lays down disqualifications for registration as an elector. These are namely unsoundness of mind as declared by a competent court, and disqualification from voting as provided in Section 11A of the 1951 RPA. Conditions for registration as a voter are laid down in Section 19 of the RPA: the person should not be less than 18 years of age and they should be ordinarily resident in a constituency. The term 'ordinarily resident' is explained in Section 20, which says a person shall not be deemed to be ordinarily resident merely because they own or possess a dwelling house in that constituency. Also, a person does not cease to be ordinarily resident if they absent themselves temporarily from their ordinary place of residence. The ECI enjoys enormous powers in respect of the preparation of electoral rolls and the conduct of elections to Parliament, the State Legislatures, and to the offices of the President and Vice President. Article 324 of the Constitution, which empowers the ECI to undertake these tasks, is characterised by the Supreme Court as a 'reservoir of power'. Since the conduct of free and fair elections is an essential feature of the basic structure of the Constitution, the ECI needs to be vested with all the necessary powers to complete its task. Nevertheless, it is inconceivable that the Constitution should confer on any authority unfettered powers. The Supreme Court has made it clear that the ECI can exercise all powers in its discretion in areas which are not covered by any statute but shall act in accordance with the law wherever it exists. In Mohinder Singh Gill v. Chief Election Commissioner (1978), the Court stated the law as follows: 'Firstly when Parliament or any State Legislature has made valid law relating to or in connection with elections, the Commission shall act in conformity with, not in violation of, such provisions but where such law is silent, Article 324 is a reservoir of power to act for the avowed purpose of pushing forward a free and fair election with expedition.' The qualifying date Let us look at the relevant provisions of the the RPA to get a perspective on the powers of the ECI in regard to revision of the electoral rolls. Section 21 of the 1950 RPA deals with the preparation and revision of electoral rolls. It speaks of four stages of revisions: (1) before elections to the Lok Sabha or Assembly; (2) before each by-election; (3) on the direction of the ECI in any year; and (4) a special revision for a constituency or part of a constituency with the ECI recording reasons for doing so. All revisions except (4) are done with reference to a qualifying date, which, under Section 14, is the first day of January. The only exception is (4): no qualifying date is mentioned because it can be done any time. The ECI order of June 24 mentions the qualifying date as 01/07/2025 and is a direction under Section 21(2)(b) of the RPA. It can be assumed that the revision being done in Bihar is under the same Section. But under this provision, the qualifying date should be 01/01/2025. The revision then should have been done from January 1, 2025. The qualifying date mentioned in the ECI order has no sanction under the law. Similarly, the term 'special intensive revision' is not found in the law. The only case where a special revision can be ordered by the ECI at any time is in relation to a constituency or a part of it and not in relation to an entire State. Thus, it is reasonable to conclude that the SIR in Bihar is not in conformity with the provisions of the RPA. The ECI has claimed in its order that it has power under Section 21 to undertake the exercise. True, but that power is limited to a constituency or part of it under Section 21(3) of the Act. While enjoying enormous powers under Article 324, the ECI is responsible to the rule of law and should be amenable to the norms of natural justice as per the Supreme Court. Electoral registration officers cannot summarily reject applications on the ground that foolproof documents are not being furnished to prove citizenship. Rule 8 of the Registration of Electors Rules clearly state that information shall be furnished 'to the best of ability' of the citizens. The ECI cannot ignore this statutory stipulation.
New Indian Express
2 hours ago
- New Indian Express
Kanhaiya Lal murder accused plea in SC seeks direction to stay 'Udaipur Files' film release
NEW DELHI: Mohammed Javed, one of the accused in the 2022 murder of Udaipur-based tailor Kanhaiya Lal Teli, has filed a writ petition in the Supreme Court seeking a fair trial and stay on the release of the film The Udaipur Files: Kanhaiyalal Tailor Murder, scheduled to be released on 11 July 2025. Javed -- 8th accused in the murder case -- in his petition argued that the film is communally provocative and could prejudice ongoing judicial proceedings. "Releasing such a movie at this juncture, portraying the accused as guilty and the story as conclusively true, has the potential to seriously prejudice the ongoing proceedings," he stated in his plea. Javed sought direction to halt the release of the film which is said to be based on events pertaining to the case. He highlighted in his petition that if the film releases, it is likely to influence public opinion in a manner that could affect the fairness of the trial. He added that the film will likely compromise the presumption of innocence. "This directly impacts the right to a free and fair trial of the Petitioner, as guaranteed under Article 21 of the Constitution of India," said, Javed in his petition filed before the top court. Udaipur-based tailor Teli was brutally murdered in June 2022, allegedly by Mohammad Riyaz and Mohammad Ghous. The NIA investigated the case and a case listing offences under the UAPA and IPC was filed against the accused. The case trial is currently ongoing before the Special NIA Court, Jaipur.
