ssc-publishes-full-list-of-1-806-tainted-candidates-post-sc-order

A day after the Supreme Court’s directive and hours after state Education Minister Bratya Basu’s press briefing on Thursday morning, the School Service Commission (SSC) released the complete list of candidates identified as “tainted” in the SSC recruitment scam. The list, containing 1,806 names, includes each candidate’s roll number, guardian’s name, date of birth and related details.

 

The SSC had been facing intense criticism from both the Supreme Court and the Calcutta High Court, with clear instructions that ineligible candidates must not be allowed to sit for the new recruitment examination and that their full list be made public. Responding to the court’s stern stance, the SSC made the list available on Thursday.

 

Education Minister Bratya Basu reiterated the government’s position during the day’s press conference, stating, “SSC has worked with transparency and impartiality. Our duty is to ensure the recruitment process is completed smoothly by December 31. If that is not possible, the SSC will proceed as per legal guidelines.”

 

 

Taking aim at the opposition, Basu added, “Opposition parties will obviously try to prevent the Mamata Banerjee government from making appointments—that is their job. Our job is to make appointments, and we will do it transparently. I do not believe that the law or justice changes from judge to judge or court to court.”

 

The controversy deepened after the cancellation of 26,000 appointments, when the Supreme Court ordered a fresh examination. However, the top court later raised concerns over the structure of the new test. While the court had directed that only “untainted” qualified candidates be retested, the state government held the examination jointly for new candidates and those previously identified as tainted—an issue not mentioned in the earlier directives.

 

From the beginning, job aspirants had questioned the fairness of the new SSC examination structure. Discontent was also widespread among fresh candidates, particularly over the provision awarding 10 bonus marks for experience, which many claimed pushed inexperienced applicants to the back of the merit line. Several candidates also alleged that the new system lacked transparency and clarity.