Categories: Education

Not all TET candidates got mark for wrong question: WB school board in HC

The Board's counsel, however, claimed that there was no criminality involved in it.

The West Bengal Primary School Education Board on Tuesday admitted before the Calcutta High Court that discrimination was committed as not all of the over 20 lakh candidates who sat for a Teachers Eligibility Test (TET) in 2014 were given one mark for a wrong question.

The Board’s counsel, however, claimed that there was no criminality involved in it.

A single bench order had directed a CBI probe into appointment of 269 candidates, who got the benefit of the additional one mark for the erroneous question, and termination of their service as primary teachers in state government-sponsored and aided schools.

In an appeal challenging that order, the Board’s counsel submitted before a division bench presided over by Justice Subrata Talukdar that there was no reason for ordering a probe by the central agency.

Admitting that discrimination was committed as not every candidate in the recruitment examination got that one mark, primary board counsel Lakshmi Gupta claimed before the bench, also comprising Justice Lapita Banerji, that there was no criminality involved in the act.

Observing that this is a public service examination and not a class test where the teacher forgets to add some children, Justice Talukdar questioned whether an investigation can be denied.

Gupta also submitted that 2,800-odd candidates agitated after the results of the 2014 TET were declared alleging error in some questions and out of them, 269 were found otherwise eligible except that they were short by one mark to pass the test.

He stated that a committee of experts which was asked by the board to check whether the questions for the examination were correct had found an error in one and proposed awarding one additional mark.

Gupta submitted that the additional mark was given to 269 candidates since they were one mark short to clear the exam.

The court observed that the chain of circumstances as stated by the board lawyer appears very fortuitous.

Appearing for the affected candidates who had moved the high court challenging the appointments, senior advocate Bikash Bhattacharya earlier questioned the criteria for identifying the agitators who were given one mark extra.

He submitted that a proper investigation is required to reveal everything in the matter.

The bench adjourned hearing in the matter till July 7.

Eduvast Desk

Recent Posts

10 Cheapest States for Retirement in 2026: Check Housing and Living Costs

Retirees looking to stretch their savings can consider affordable states with lower housing, taxes and…

2 days ago

SelectHealth NationsBenefits Card Activation Made Easy: Login Steps for 2026

Activate your SelectHealth NationsBenefits card online in 2026, check your benefit balance, view eligible products,…

3 days ago

How to Activate Your Hy-Vee PERKS Card Online: Simple 2026 Guide

Learn how to activate and use your new Hy-Vee PERKS card in 2026 to access…

3 days ago

Best States to Retire in 2026: Check the Top 10 States for Seniors

These states stand out for affordability, healthcare, taxes, quality of life and daily expenses, helping…

3 days ago

Medicare Income Limits 2026: New Rules and Premium Amounts Explained

Medicare income limits for 2026 can affect Part B and Part D premiums, while people…

4 days ago

Medicare IRMAA Brackets 2026: Income Limits and Monthly Premiums Explained

Medicare IRMAA brackets for 2026 determine how much higher-income beneficiaries pay for Part B and…

4 days ago