In Brief
Teachers appointed to aided madrasas in West Bengal sought relief through contempt proceedings, claiming the Court's prior judgment validated their appointments and interim orders mandated salary payment. The respondent institutions argued no such unconditional mandate existed and that verification of statutory qualifications, institution recognition, recruitment procedures, and staffing patterns remained essential. The Supreme Court held that contempt proceedings cannot examine merits beyond an order's explicit directions. The prior judgment's validity declaration applied only to appointments conforming to applicable rules. Rather than resolve disputed employment claims in contempt proceedings, the Court constituted a committee to verify each petitioner's eligibility and appointed status against prescribed statutory criteria, with the State to issue final orders thereafter.
The lawyer headnote and full judgment text are available to registered users.