A cloud has been cast on the school recruitment process, days after an attempt to make a fresh start.

A candidate who had written the school service commission’s 2016 selection tests but failed to get the job filed a petition in Calcutta High Court challenging the recruitment notification that the SSC published on May 30.

Lubana Parvin, 37, who was among the wait-listed candidates then, alleged that the rules, which say those participating in the fresh process would be awarded 10 marks
for teaching experience, favour in-service teachers in retaining their jobs beyond December.

“We did not get jobs because of illegalities, following which the Supreme Court had to cancel the entire panel based on the 2016 tests. The in-service teachers not specifically found tainted and allowed to go to schools till December will take part in the new process to retain their jobs. The state government will award them 10 marks for prior teaching experience. But what about us?” said Parvin.

“We did not get jobs because of corrupt practices. And now we are being discriminated against by allowing a relaxation to those in service.”

According to her, in a 100-mark selection test, if 10 marks are “just gifted like that”, the competition is skewed against candidates like her.

She also alleged that the apex court had said the 2016 recruitment rules had to be followed but the SSC has not complied.

In 2016, the written tests carried 55 marks, academic qualifications 35 marks and interview 10 marks.

In 2025, the break-up of marks to select assistant teachers for the secondary and higher secondary levels in government-aided schools is different. The test carries 60 marks, teaching experience 10, lecture demonstration 10, qualifications 10 and interview 10.

Parvin alleged that allotting 10 marks for lecture demonstration would also benefit in-service teachers.

The commission refuted the charges.

A senior SSC official said: “The Supreme Court did not say in its order that the 2016 rules have to be retained. Awarding 10 marks does not necessarily mean we have tried to favour the 15,404 teachers... The notification only says in-service and contractual teachers will be given up to 10 marks based on their years of service. We have not specified any batch.”

Justice Partha Sarathi Chatterjee accepted the petition and fixed June 5 for the next hearing.

Lawyer Firdaus Shamim, representing the petitioner, said they have also challenged the maximum cut-off age set by the SSC.

The new rules say candidates other than the 15,403 in-service teachers would have to be less than 40 years old to write the tests.

In its April 17 order, the Supreme Court allowed teachers “not specifically found tainted” to write the fresh selection tests without any age bar.

“This means someone who was 36 in 2016 when the tests were held, and could not get the job because of the recruitment fraud, cannot write the fresh tests. This is discriminatory and unfair, “ said Shamim.

“Reducing the marks for academic qualifications from 35 to 10 to make room for teaching experience and lecture demonstration also goes against the court’s order.”

An SSC official said any recruitment test has to have an age bar. “That is a given.”

“We reduced the marks for academic qualifications because we wanted to recruit candidates based more on the written tests and lecture demonstrations... Besides, it is better not to give too much emphasis to marks obtained during the two-year Covid period when campuses were shut and undergraduate and postgraduate students wrote exams from home. We wanted to be as fair as possible in the tests this time,” the official said.

Contacted, SSC chairperson Siddhartha Majumdar declined to comment.