The classification of candidates as tainted extends beyond previously defined categories, and judicial intervention is precluded by ongoing Supreme Court considerations.

JUDGMENT :

SAUGATA BHATTACHARYYA, J.

1. All the writ petitions are taken up together for consideration since common issue is involved.

2. Affidavits of service filed on behalf of the petitioners are taken on record.

3. Writ petitions are filed questioning the list containing names of tainted candidates which was published vide memo dated 30^th August, 2025 issued by the Secretary, West Bengal Central School Service Commission (for short, “Commission”). List dated 30^th August, 2025 features names of 1804 (one thousand eight hundred and four ) candidates who have been declared as tainted candidates in connection with their participation in 1^st State Level Selection Test, 2016 (for short, “1^st SLST, 2016”) for Classes IX-X and XI-XII.

4. At the outset, it needs to be recorded that in terms of order of the Hon’ble Supreme Court dated 28^th August, 2025 passed on Special Leave to Appeal (C) No. 23784 of 2025 (Bejoy Biswas & Ors. Vs. State of West Bengal & Ors.) said list dated 30^th August, 2025 was published by the Commission.

5. As per case presented on behalf of the petitioners they either participated in 1^st SLST, 2016 for Classes IX-X or 1^st SLST, 2016 for Classes XI-XII but they lost job in terms of the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court dated 3rd April, 2025 delivered in Appeal arising out of Special Leave Petition (Civil) No. 9586 of 2024 (State of West Bengal Vs. Baishakhi Bhattacharyya (Chatterjee) & Others) since entire selection process was declared null and void on finding egregious illegalities.

6. According to the petitioners after 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 (hereinafter referred to as “said Rules of 2025”) Admit Cards were issued to them but based on the list dated 30^th August, 2025 issued by the Commission containing names of tainted candidates their Admit Cards were cancelled, which prompted them to come before this Court with the present writ petitions.

7. Mr. Anindya Lahiri and Mr. Sakya Sen, learned Senior Advocates representing the petitioners have placed reliance on the judgment dated 22^nd April, 2024 delivered by the Hon’ble Division Bench on a batch of matters first one being WPA 30649 of 2016 (Baishakhi Bhattacharyya (Chatterjee) & Ors. Vs. State of West Bengal & Ors.) in order to contend that petitioners are not coming under the category of tainted candidates as defined in paragraph 363 (iv) of the said judgment. It is further contended that as per observations made by the Hon’ble Division Bench in the judgment dated 22nd April, 2024 persons who had been appointed outside the panel or after expiry of panel or who submitted blank OMR sheets ought to be treated as tainted candidates but petitioners are not coming under those categories. Therefore cancellation of their Admit Cards by publication of list on 30^th August, 2025, was not warranted. 8) In addition thereto, reliance is placed on observations made by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the judgment dated 3rd April, 2025 delivered in Baishakhi Bhattacharyya (Chatterjee) (supra) where in paragraph -31 it was discussed that it was not significant so far cases of rank jumping and direction given by the High Court to appoint candidates after expiry of the validity of the panel at the stage when Court was not aware of illegalities of appointment procedure. Based on several considerations including rank jump