In a significant move to ensure transparency in teacher recruitment, the Calcutta High Court has issued a firm directive to the West Bengal Central School Service Commission (WBCSSC). The court has ordered the commission to publicly disclose the complete list of candidates deemed 'tainted' from the annulled 2016 selection panel. This action aims to prevent these individuals from entering the ongoing State Level Selection Test (SLST) recruitment process for 2025.
Court's Interim Directive for Full Disclosure
Justice Amrita Sinha, presiding over the case, issued the interim order on Monday. The bench was responding to concerns raised by petitioners' counsel, Firdous Samim, who pointed out that the list of tainted candidates previously submitted by the WBCSSC to the court was incomplete. The number of candidates published earlier was far greater than the list provided to the judiciary.
Justice Sinha mandated that the WBCSSC must publish the detailed list, which should include the candidates' names, their fathers' names, and specifics of the appointments they secured in state-run schools. These appointments were made before the Supreme Court invalidated the entire 2016 selection list.
Categorization of Irregularities
The court has instructed the commission to classify the tainted candidates under three distinct categories for clarity. These categories are:
- Rank Jump Cases: Candidates who received appointments despite a significant, unexplained improvement in their rank.
- OMR Mismatch Cases: Candidates where discrepancies were found between their original Optical Mark Recognition answer sheets and the evaluation records.
- Out-of-Panel Appointments: Candidates who were appointed after the official expiry date of the 2016 selection panel.
This categorization is expected to shed light on the nature of the irregularities that plagued the earlier recruitment drive.
Compliance Deadline and Broader Context
In a related order from November 27, Justice Sinha had already directed the WBCSSC to publish the list of tainted candidates who were appointed after the 2016 panel had officially expired. The court has now set a strict deadline for further compliance. The commission must place before the court, by December 6, the list of candidates from the 2016 panel who were appointed after its expiry.
This legal scrutiny stems from a Supreme Court order dated November 26, 2025. The apex court had explicitly ordered that no candidate from the scrapped 2016 panel, who is found to be 'tainted', should be allowed to slip into the fresh SLST 2025 recruitment process. The High Court's directive is a direct enforcement measure to uphold the Supreme Court's ruling and restore integrity to the teacher recruitment system in West Bengal.
Implications for Ongoing Recruitment
The public disclosure of these names serves a dual purpose. Firstly, it acts as a deterrent, ensuring that individuals involved in previous malpractices are identified and barred. Secondly, it introduces a layer of public accountability, allowing for scrutiny by stakeholders, including other candidates and civil society. The move is seen as a crucial step towards cleaning up the recruitment process for government school teachers, a sector that has been marred by allegations of corruption and procedural violations in recent years.
The next hearing in the matter is expected to follow the December 6 submission, where the court will assess the commission's compliance with its comprehensive orders.
