Summary
Teachers and staff appointed by aided madrasas in West Bengal during the challenge to the West Bengal Madrasa Service Commission Act, 2008 filed contempt petitions alleging that the State's insistence on verifying their appointments before releasing salaries violated paragraph 58 of Shaikh Md. Rafique, which deemed such appointments valid. The Supreme Court held that the judgment validated appointments only to the extent they conformed to the applicable rules and norms, that verification of recognition, qualifications, vacancies and procedure was justified, and that a contempt court cannot travel beyond the order or decide the merits of each claim. To avoid delay and multiplicity, it constituted under Article 142 a committee headed by a retired Calcutta High Court Judge to verify the claims within four months, with the State to pass orders within two months thereafter.
Issues
- Whether paragraph 58 of Shaikh Md. Rafique, deeming appointments made by madrasas during the litigation to be valid, obliged the State to release salaries without verifying the legality of each appointment, so that insistence on verification amounted to contempt.
- Whether a court exercising contempt jurisdiction can adjudicate the merits of each petitioner's entitlement to be treated as a regularly appointed employee.
Provisions considered
- Sections 8, 10, 11 and 12, West Bengal Madrasa Service Commission Act, 2008These provisions regulating appointment of teachers in aided madrasas were upheld in Shaikh Md. Rafique; the deeming of appointments made during the litigation did not dispense with the recruitment rules, staffing patterns, qualification and recognition requirements under which aided and recognised institutions may appoint staff. (¶¶ 2, 6, 7, 8)
- Section 12 and the scope of contempt jurisdiction, Contempt of Courts Act, 1971Following Sudhir Vasudeva, J.S. Parihar and Midnapore Peoples' Cooperative Bank, the court must confine itself to directions explicit or self-evident in the order said to be violated and cannot decide issues on the merits of the dispute or issue supplemental directions. (¶¶ 9, 11, 12, 13)
- Article 142, Constitution of IndiaTo prevent further delay and multifarious litigation from departmental verification, the Court constituted an independent committee to verify the petitioners' claims on specified criteria. (¶¶ 14, 15, 16, 17)
Held
- The judgment contains no discussion of how the madrasas appointed staff, the applicable rules, circulars and guidelines, whether a transparent method was followed, whether the madrasa was recognised or whether the selecting body was duly constituted; given the interim orders that no equity would be created, the appointments were declared valid only to the extent they conformed to the rules and binding norms, and the respondents' insistence on verification is justified. No determination of contempt can be made without such verification, and the merits of each case cannot be examined in contempt jurisdiction. (¶¶ 4, 7, 8, 10, 13)
- A committee chaired by Justice Debi Prasad Dey, retired Judge of the Calcutta High Court, with a Principal Secretary-rank IAS officer of the West Bengal cadre and a retired State university Registrar nominated by the State, is to examine whether the madrasa was recognised on the date of appointment, whether the appointee held the prescribed qualifications and experience, whether the recruitment procedure in the Gazette notifications of 11.03.2015 and 04.03.2016 was followed, whether the appointment was against an existing vacancy within the staffing pattern, whether the appointee actually worked, and whether the appointment was backdated; the State must notify the committee within four weeks, publicise it in English and Bengali newspapers and on the department's website, and provide infrastructure and staff. (¶¶ 17, 18, 19)
Result
Contempt petitions, appeal and pending applications disposed of; leave granted in SLP (C) No. 3352 of 2021; committee headed by Justice Debi Prasad Dey (retired) constituted under Article 142 to verify the petitioners' claims and report to the State Government within four months, the State to pass appropriate orders within two months thereafter; chairperson's remuneration fixed at Rs. 10,00,000 and each member's at Rs. 5,00,000.