A protest by temporary workers over five months of unpaid salaries and pending allowances disrupted operations at Panihati Municipality in West Bengal on Thursday, with demonstrators blocking the civic body’s main gate and later clashing with police attempting to remove them, according to a report by Sangbad Pratidin.
The workers said their wages and allowances had remained unpaid for an extended period and demanded that the municipality clear the dues quickly. Their demonstration prevented people from entering the municipal premises, affecting access to the civic office during the protest.
The disruption also affected the movement of North 24 Parganas district BJP president Chandicharan Roy and BJP leader Joy Saha, who reportedly faced difficulty entering the municipality. The BJP said that while workers had the right to protest, blocking the main gate and obstructing official work was not acceptable.
Police intervened to clear the entrance, after which a physical altercation reportedly broke out between the police and the protesting workers. The report does not provide details of injuries, arrests or any formal police case connected with the confrontation.
The dispute also brought renewed political scrutiny to the appointment and continuation of the temporary workforce. Chandicharan Roy claimed that the workers had been appointed on an urgent basis during the Covid period and that Trinamool Congress councillors later extended their terms at their discretion. He further alleged that some workers had performed personal tasks for councillors instead of municipal duties, including cooking, shopping and driving. These claims were made by the BJP and were not independently established in the report.
Joy Saha questioned the criteria used for the appointments and asked whether any examination or formal selection process had taken place. He also alleged that some people working at the homes of Trinamool councillors and leaders were being paid from public funds. The report does not include a response from Panihati Municipality, the councillors named in the allegations or the workers’ representatives on the recruitment-related claims.
The protest highlights two separate administrative questions for the municipality: whether temporary workers’ wages and allowances have been withheld, and what records exist regarding their recruitment, terms of service and assigned duties. Resolving the immediate payment dispute would require the civic body to clarify the outstanding amount, the reason for the delay and the timeline for disbursement. The recruitment allegations would require documentary examination of appointment orders, extensions and attendance or work-allocation records.
The report states that the incident created tension on the municipal premises. No official timeline for payment of the workers’ dues or formal review of the appointments was provided.
