SSC Court Order: High Court Strict Order to SSC Regarding Tainted List Update
SSC Court Order: The West Bengal School Service Commission (SSC) has once again come under significant pressure following a directive from the Calcutta High Court. In a bid to ensure transparency in recruitment-related cases, Justice Amrita Sinha has ordered the commission to publish detailed information regarding candidates. The strict stance taken by the judge in Court Room No. 18 has rekindled hope among job aspirants.
High Court’s Directive: What Data Must Be Published?
Justice Amrita Sinha has made it clear that merely publishing a general list is insufficient. For the sake of transparency, full details of ‘tainted’ or accused candidates must be made public. The court has instructed the commission’s counsel that the published list must mandatorily include the following information:
- Roll Number
- Date of Birth
- Parent’s Name
- Subject
- District
- School Name
- Category
The primary objective of publishing these detailed metrics is to clearly distinguish between candidates from the 2016 and 2025 recruitment processes. This list will help clarify who is accused due to OMR sheet discrepancies versus those affected by the expiry of the panel validity.
Context of the Hearing and Legal Arguments
During the hearing, lawyers representing the petitioners argued that the currently published lists lack clarity. Advocate Firdaus Shamim pointed out the confusion arising between the 952 OMR mismatch candidates from the 2016 recruitment and the 1806 candidates from the subsequent recruitment. He demanded that a detailed district-wise list be published to segregate ‘untainted’ (valid) candidates from the ‘tainted’ ones.
Furthermore, Advocate Ali Ahsan Alamgir drew the court’s attention to a critical error. He noted that many candidates from 2016 who received offer letters but did not join the service have also been included in the current ‘tainted’ list. As a result, these individuals are being unfairly barred from participating in this year’s exams or interview processes. He termed this a significant misstep by the commission.
Commission’s Stance and Next Steps
During the proceedings, the commission’s lawyers stated that they had published a list of 1806 individuals following CBI instructions. However, when questioned by the judge regarding the publication of the list for the 952 OMR mismatch candidates, the commission admitted that the process is underway and will be published soon.
Important Upcoming Dates:
- January 13: A hearing regarding the expiry of the panel is scheduled. A list of those not in service as of December 31 or August 31, according to the CBI list, may be published.
- January 27 or February: Hearings for EWS and other related cases have been postponed to these dates.
Experts believe that if this court order is implemented effectively, it will significantly clear the long-standing confusion surrounding the recruitment process.
