Priyanka Tiwari
Share
A schoolteacher from Canning, South 24 Parganas, identified as R Singh, attempted suicide on Thursday following the Supreme Court's decision to cancel over 25,000 school jobs under the 2016 West Bengal School Service Commission (SSC) recruitment panel. Singh, reportedly under severe financial stress and harassment from creditors, is currently receiving treatment at Canning Hospital.
A Personal Crisis Triggered by Systemic Failure
Singh’s landlord discovered her unconscious and rushed her to the hospital. A suicide note found nearby expressed her despair over losing her job and the collapse of her efforts to rebuild her life.
“I’m sorry. I tried to fix everything, but the job loss broke me,” the note reportedly read.
Supreme Court Scraps 2016 WBSSC Panel Over Massive Irregularities
On April 4, the Supreme Court upheld a Calcutta High Court ruling that voided the appointment of 25,753 teaching and non-teaching staff from the 2016 SSC panel. The court declared the process “tainted beyond resolution,” citing:
Massive rank manipulation
Fake appointment letters
Destruction of original OMR sheets
No backup of scanned answer sheets
Even candidates not directly accused of fraud lost their jobs due to the widespread corruption.
Partial Relief for Some Candidates
Disabled candidates allowed by the High Court to remain will continue in service.
Age relaxation is granted to terminated employees who want to reapply.
Former government employees among the terminated can return without loss of seniority or pay scale.
Emotional Toll on Innocent Job-Holders
While the court is working to rectify the corruption, thousands of innocent people, like Singh, are suffering:
Loss of income
Creditor pressure
Emotional breakdowns
Uncertainty over future employment
Singh’s suicide attempt highlights the human cost of administrative malpractice.
Systemic Gaps and Legal Repercussions
The Supreme Court criticized WBSSC for deliberate cover-ups, especially:
Destroying OMR sheets without digital records.
Failing to explain discrepancies in marks and selection lists.
Appointing candidates who never appeared on official rankings.
These failures made any effort at fair verification “impossible,” the court ruled.
--Advertisement--
