Kolkata: The Supreme Court dismissed the West Bengal government’s review petition against its April 3 verdict, in relation to the recruitment scam in the secondary and higher secondary schools, that quashed the entire panel of the 2016 recruitment conducted by the West Bengal School Service Commission (WBSSC), citing large-scale irregularities.
The ruling effectively upholds the Calcutta High Court’s earlier order and apparently closes the door on further appeals on the recruitment drive impacting 25,753 jobs. The order was given on August 5, 2025 and was uploaded on its website on August 19, 2025.
On April 3, 2025, the apex court gave its judgement after finding widespread irregularities and corruption, ruling that it was impossible to distinguish between eligible and ineligible candidates.
The court had directed the state to hold a fresh recruitment process within December 31, which is now afoot. The cancellation impacted 25,753 jobs. Eligible (untainted) candidates employed under the scrapped panel were allowed to reapply in the new selection.
On Tuesday, a bench of Justices Sanjay Kumar and Satish Chandra Sharma noted that its earlier judgment had been delivered after “extensive and exhaustive” hearings and a detailed consideration of both facts and law.
The court said the settled legal position was applied in light of the findings of the Justice (Retd.) RK Bag Committee and the Central Bureau of Investigation, as well as the admissions made by the WBSSC and the West Bengal Board of Secondary Education in their affidavits.
The court reiterated that the Commission’s failure to retain the original physical OMR sheets or even mirror copies was a serious lapse. The concealment of irregularities by the authorities, it observed, further complicated verification and left no doubt that the recruitment process was fundamentally compromised.
“Protecting the purity of the selection process is paramount,” the court held, adding that invalidating the selection was necessary to uphold the sanctity of recruitment. While acknowledging that the cancellation of untainted appointments would cause “heartburn and anguish,” the court emphasized that maintaining fairness in public appointments had to take precedence.
The bench also endorsed the adverse remarks made earlier against officials responsible for what it described as an “imbroglio” affecting thousands of candidates. It held that the review petitions, in effect seeking a rehearing of the matter, did not merit reconsideration, as “all relevant aspects have already been examined and considered comprehensively.”
The court further rejected requests for listing the review pleas in open court and dismissed other pending interlocutory applications.