Calcutta High Court Declines Plea By 'Tainted' Candidates Challenging Cancellation Of Admit Cards For SSC Re-Exam

The Calcutta High Court has declined a plea by 'tainted candidates' in the SSC Recruitment process, embroiled in the cash for jobs scam, challenging the cancellation of their admit cards to appear in the re-examination ordered by the Supreme Court.

Their admit cards were cancelled in line with the Supreme Court's directions to disallow tainted candidates from the fresh recruitment process, after the Calcutta High Court directed the state to implement the Supreme Court's directions and adhere to the timeline imposed on it.

In declining the pleas challenging the same, Justice Saugata Bhattacharya held:

"Not a single petitioner before this Court was permitted to function as Assistant Teacher in terms of the order of the Supreme Court dated 17th April, 2025...[those] who were not found to be tainted were permitted to function in their respective schools for the academic interest of the students taking note of lack of teachers in the schools. But at the same time, Supreme Court framed time schedule for bringing the fresh selection process...since only untainted teachers were permitted to work as Assistant Teachers till 31st December, 2025...This Court has no hesitation in refusing their contentions claiming to be untainted teachers."

The writ petitions were filed questioning the list containing names of tainted candidates, featuring names of 1804 candidates who have been declared as tainted candidates in connection with their participation in the 1st State Level Selection Test, 2016 for Classes IX-X and XI-XII.

Court noted that in terms of the order of the Supreme Court, dated 28th August, 2025, the said list was published by the Commission.

Petitioners submitted that after the recruitment notification was published on 30th May, 2025 on promulgation of the West Bengal School Service Commission (Selection for Appointment to the Posts of Assistant Teachers for Upper Primary Level of Classes [except Work Education and Physical Education] Classes IX-X and Classes XI-XII) Rules, 2025, Admit Cards were issued to them, but based on the list dated 30th August, 2025 issued by the Commission containing names of tainted candidates their Admit Cards were cancelled, which prompted them to come before this Court.

Senior Advocates representing the petitioners submitted that the petitioners were not under the category of tainted candidates as defined in paragraph 363 of the High Court's judgement dated 22nd April 2024, which held that persons who had been appointed outside the panel or after expiry of the panel or who submitted blank OMR sheets ought to be treated as tainted candidates. Therefore, cancellation of their Admit Cards by publication of the list on 30th August, 2025, was not warranted.

It was also submitted on behalf of the petitioners that observations made by the Division Bench of the High Court in the judgment dated 22nd April, 2024, especially in paragraph 363 (iv) were not interfered with by the Supreme Court in its judgment dated 3rd April, 2025. Therefore, identification of tainted candidates needs to be based on three categories as delineated in paragraph 363(iv) of the 2024 judgement.

According to the petitioners, some of the candidates were allowed to continue their service but they were appointed after expiry of the panel and their names do not feature in the list dated 30th August, 2025.

Kalyan Bandyopadhyay, Senior Advocate representing the Commission, submitted that apart from the aforesaid three categories of tainted candidates as described in paragraph 363 (iv) of the judgment of the Division Bench dated 22nd April, 2024, other categories of tainted candidates involving rank jumping and candidates identified by Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) were taken into consideration by the Supreme Court in the judgment dated 3rd April, 2024.

It is specifically submitted that list of tainted candidates dated 30th August, 2025 was also prepared based on report of CBI indicating that there were cases of OMR mismatches and the Commission found them as tainted candidates consequently those candidates were included in the list dated 30th August, 2025.

According to the Commission, categories of tainted candidates ought not to be confined to the categories as contained in paragraph 363 (iv) of the judgment of the Division Bench dated 22nd April, 2024.

It is also submitted on behalf of the Commission that the Supreme Court permitted only untainted Assistant Teachers to continue to function till 31st December, 2025. 

None of the petitioners before this Court today are presently working as Assistant Teachers in their respective schools based on their selection in 1st SLST, 2016 for Classes IX-X and XI-XII. Therefore petitioners may not be treated as untainted teachers, the state said.

It was submitted on behalf of the Commission that as per CBI report there are cases of OMR mismatches and the candidates involved therein are identified as tainted candidates and this Court does not find fault with such exercise.

Moreover, not a single petitioner before this Court was permitted to function as Assistant Teacher in terms of the order of the Supreme Court dated 17th April, 2025.

Accordingly, upon hearing the arguments, the court held, "It needs to be recorded herein when untainted teachers were permitted to continue their services till 31st December, 2025 just after the order was passed on 17th April, 2025 by the Hon'ble Supreme Court present petitioners did not raise any demur, at least that is not demonstrated before this Court today."

It further said that Special Leave to Appeal (C) No. 23784/2025 [Bejoy Biswas (supra)] and Special Leave Petition (Civil) Diary No. 46049/2025 [Bibek Paria (supra)] are pending for further consideration before the Supreme Court, in connection with which list dated 30th August, 2025 was published containing names of tainted candidates, and thus dismissed the pleas.

Case: SAMPA GHOSH VS. STATE OF WEST BENGAL & OTHERS 

Case No: W.P.A. NO 20845 OF 2025

Click here to read order