SSC Interview List Case: High Court’s Stern Directive to Exclude Ineligible Candidates! Detailed Information Must Be Published

SSC Interview List: A crucial hearing was held at the Calcutta High Court regarding the SSC (School Service Commission) recruitment case, involving intense arguments over the new interview list and verification process. In this hearing at Court No. 18, the judge issued a series of stern directives against the School Service Commission, which is being seen as a major step towards ensuring transparency in the recruitment process. After a prolonged debate between the petitioners’ allegations and the commission’s arguments, the court ultimately ruled in favour of transparency.

Several Serious Allegations at the Core of the Hearing

At the outset of the hearing, the petitioners’ lawyers, notably Pratik Das and Bikash Ranjan Bhattacharya, drew the court’s attention to the fact that many candidates who were identified as ‘tainted’ or ineligible in the 2016 recruitment process have surprisingly been included in the new interview list.

According to their allegations, the names of the following individuals were found on the new list:

• Nitish Ranjan Barman
• Debolina Mondal
• Narayan Chandra
• Jainal Abedin

Although the commission stated that the roll numbers of these candidates are different, the petitioners countered that the individuals could be the same despite having different roll numbers. To resolve this complexity, advocate Bikash Ranjan Bhattacharya demanded that merely names or roll numbers are not sufficient. To confirm the correct identity of the candidates, their complete details, including OMR sheets, father’s name, and category, must be made public.

The Commission’s Argument and the Judge’s Directive

Senior Advocate Kalyan Banerjee argued on behalf of the commission. He stated that physically handicapped (PH) candidates were given protection in accordance with the Supreme Court’s order. He alleged that the petitioners were trying to obstruct the court’s proceedings by creating unnecessary complications.

After hearing arguments from both sides, the judge issued clear and strict directives. His primary objective was to maintain transparency in the recruitment process and to strictly adhere to the Supreme Court’s verdict.

The court’s main directives are as follows:

1. Publication of Detailed List: The commission must immediately publish a detailed list of all candidates in the 2025 interview list, including their father’s name, OMR, and other necessary information.
2. Verification Process: The current list must be thoroughly cross-verified with the 2016 ‘tainted’ list.
3. Removal of Ineligible Candidates: If during verification it is found that any ineligible candidate has “slipped through the net” into the new list, they must be immediately removed from the recruitment process.
4. Adherence to Supreme Court’s Ruling: The judge reiterated that as per the Supreme Court’s verdict, no ineligible candidate, even if they belong to the physically handicapped category, can be given a chance at any stage of the recruitment process.

The next hearing for this case has been scheduled for the 27th instead of the 28th, due to the unavailability of advocate Bikash Ranjan Bhattacharya. It is expected that the commission will present the detailed information in compliance with the court’s order at the next hearing.