Wbssc Tainted List: SSC 2016 Recruitment Corruption Commission Publishes List of Ineligible Candidates with Names and Fathers Names Under Court Pressure
Wbssc Tainted List: A significant development has emerged in the West Bengal School Service Commission (WBSSC) 2016 recruitment corruption case. Following the strict orders of Honorable Justice Amrita Sinha of the Calcutta High Court, the Commission has finally taken action. Adhering to the court’s directive, the WBSSC has published a detailed list of candidates identified as ineligible or ‘Tainted’ in the 2016 recruitment process. Experts believe that the publication of this list, after prolonged delays, marks a crucial step in unraveling the corruption scandal.
This new initiative primarily exposes the names of those who secured jobs illegally in Group-C and Group-D (Non-Teaching) posts. Previously published lists were criticized for a lack of transparency. Responding to these allegations, Justice Sinha exerted pressure on the Commission, forcing them to reveal all confidential details of the illegally appointed candidates to the public.
Details Published in the List for Transparency
The new list published by the Commission is highly significant as it contains specific personal details of the job recipients, which will aid in their precise identification. This leaves no room for fake or illegal candidates to hide. According to the information provided by the Commission, the following details have been mentioned in the list:
| Sl. No. | Details Provided |
|---|---|
| 1 | Serial Number & Roll Number |
| 2 | Candidate’s Full Name |
| 3 | Post Name (Group-C Clerk, Group-D Peon, Lab Attendant, etc.) |
| 4 | Parents’ Name |
| 5 | Date of Birth |
Specifically, the inclusion of parents’ names and dates of birth will eliminate confusion between individuals with similar names, allowing for the easy identification of the specific ineligible candidate.
Prevalence of Corruption in Group-D Posts
An analysis of the published list reveals that the roots of corruption run deep. However, statistics indicate that the number of illegal appointments in Group-D or Peon posts is significantly higher than in Group-C or Clerical posts. This suggests that manipulation was most rampant in the recruitment of Class IV staff. This revelation raises the question: was the trend of selling jobs in exchange for money more prevalent in lower-tier posts?
Discrepancy in Numbers: Questions Raised on Commission’s Role
While the court’s order has brought some transparency, a cloud of uncertainty remains over the entire issue. An analysis of the data reveals a major discrepancy:
- Court’s Order: The Honorable Court had directed the publication of a list comprising a total of 7,293 ineligible (Tainted) candidates.
- Published List: However, the list or information currently published by the Commission contains the names and details of only 3,512 ineligible candidates.
According to reports, this figure is less than half of the total ineligible candidates. Naturally, questions are being raised: why was the information of the remaining ‘Tainted’ candidates withheld? Is the Commission intentionally trying to shield the others, or is there another major reason behind this? This issue has sparked renewed outrage among job aspirants and petitioners.
After a long period of attempting to conceal information, the SSC has finally been forced to publish this detailed list under court pressure, which is undoubtedly a positive development. This will make it possible to identify illegally appointed candidates both socially and legally. However, since the complete list of 7,293 individuals as directed by the court has not yet been fully disclosed, doubts regarding the Commission’s intent and role persist. The entire state is now waiting to see what steps the court will take regarding this numerical discrepancy in the coming days.
