Kolkata, June 20: A single-judge bench at the Calcutta High Court is set to announce its ruling on Friday regarding a petition that contests the West Bengal government's notification for providing monthly stipends to non-teaching personnel in Group-C and Group-D categories. These individuals lost their positions in state-run schools following a Supreme Court ruling in April.

The hearings concluded last week under Justice Amrita Sinha's bench.

On June 9, Justice Sinha instructed the state government verbally to refrain from disbursing any funds to the affected non-teaching staff until a formal order is issued.

She raised concerns about the rationale behind the state government's decision to offer stipends to those who lost their jobs post-Supreme Court ruling, as well as the method used to determine the stipend amounts. Additionally, she inquired whether there had been previous instances where the state compensated employees who lost their jobs.

Justice Sinha also questioned what benefits the state would derive from providing stipends to these non-teaching staff members.

Last month, the West Bengal government announced a new initiative through the Labour Department. Under the "West Bengal Livelihood and Special Security Interim Scheme,” non-teaching staff in Group-C would receive a monthly stipend of Rs 25,000, while those in Group-D would be entitled to Rs 20,000.

Chief Minister Mamata Banerjee stated that the scheme was introduced due to the tendency of certain individuals and vested interests to file public interest litigations against state government decisions at the Calcutta High Court.

However, legal challenges have emerged following multiple petitions against the notification.

On April 3, the Supreme Court upheld a Calcutta High Court ruling that invalidated 25,753 school appointments made through the WBSSC, indicating that the panel needed to be dissolved due to the authorities' inability to differentiate between "tainted" and "untainted" candidates.

In response, both the state government and the WBSSC have submitted review petitions to the Supreme Court, requesting a reconsideration of the ruling.