WBSSC Recruitment Case: 1000 Tainted Candidates Found in Merit List High Court Orders Affidavit
WBSSC Recruitment: A fresh wave of controversy has erupted in the Calcutta High Court regarding the West Bengal School Service Commission’s (WBSSC) recruitment process. Serious questions have been raised about the provisional merit list for Class 11 and 12 teacher recruitment. Allegations suggest that the list is cluttered with ineligible candidates, effectively blocking opportunities for genuine aspirants.
The Controversy of 1000 ‘Tainted’ Names
During a significant hearing before the bench of Justice Amrita Sinha, petitioners claimed that over 1,000 ineligible or ‘tainted’ candidates have found their way into the recently published provisional merit list. The core argument put forth is that the presence of these unqualified individuals has prevented deserving and eligible candidates from receiving calls for verification or interviews. The petitioners have stated they are ready to submit the specific list of these 1,000 names to the court in the upcoming hearing.
Court’s Direction and SSC’s Stance
Responding to the severe allegations, the Commission (SSC) referred to Supreme Court guidelines, asserting that if any ineligible candidate “slips through the net” by mistake, their candidature will be revoked immediately upon detection, regardless of the stage of recruitment. The Commission emphasized that they are aware of the situation and ready to take necessary action.
However, the Court focused on the remedial measures for the deprived candidates. Justice Sinha questioned the Commission on the fate of the vacancies created after removing these tainted candidates—specifically, whether the eligible candidates waiting in line would then be called for verification. The Court has directed the SSC to clarify its official stance on this matter by filing an affidavit within four weeks.
Issues with Disability Reservation Roster
The hearing also highlighted discrepancies regarding the Physically Handicapped (PH) category. Petitioners alleged violations of the 100-point roster and the 4% reservation mandate. Specifically, there were complaints about Orthopedically Handicapped candidates being treated as General category applicants. The Commission argued that they operate merely as an agency following state rules and mentioned that such vacancies are usually ‘carried forward’ to the next recruitment drive. An affidavit has been sought regarding this issue as well.
This judicial intervention has rekindled hope among deprived job seekers. All eyes are now on the affidavit to be submitted by the Commission.
