Supreme Court seeks Centre's response to PIL alleging irregularities in conduct of SSC exams

The Supreme Court on September 4 sought the Central government's response to a public interest litigation (PIL) petition that sought directions to ensure the smooth conduct of the Staff Selection Commission (SSC) exams [Nikhil Kumar vs. Union of India & Anr.].

The Bench of Justices PS Narasimha and Atul S Chandurkar issued notice to the Central government and the SSC on a plea filed by an SSC aspirant, Nikhil Kumar.

Kumar (petitioner) claimed that there were large-scale irregularities in the conduct of the exams after the SSC roped in Eduquity Career Technologies as a technical partner for conducting computer-based tests. The exam was earlier conducted with Tata Consultancy Services (TCS) as the technical partner.

The plea flags concerns about lapses in multiple recruitment examinations, including the SSC Selection Post/Phase XIII Examination and the Stenographer Examination Grade ‘C’ and ‘D’ 2025.

The petitioner has now sought the constitution of an independent court-appointed committee to oversee the upcoming SSC examinations, including the Combined Graduate Level (CGL) exam, 2025.

It calls for cancellation and re-conduct of examinations administered by Eduquity, an independent probe into the award of the contract, formulation of binding standard operating procedures, and compensation to affected aspirants.

The petitioner has also highlighted that despite a report by the Singhvi Committee formed in 2018 to ensure fairness in SSC exams, it was never made public.

The plea states that while TCS had maintained transparent and largely glitch-free exam processes, the sudden shift to Eduquity has led to severe disruptions.

Candidates reported being issued incorrect or incomplete centre details, delayed admit cards and were often compelled to travel hundreds of kilometres to reach examination centres.

During the exams, aspirants allegedly faced frozen computer screens, blurred answer options, abrupt shutdowns, and repeated biometric failures.

Many were denied even pen and paper, the petitioner said, adding that there concerns that invigilators were also found untrained, and power outages halted examinations in several centres. In some cases, students protesting these lapses were allegedly threatened or subjected to rough treatment.

The petitioner also says that the SSC itself admitted that nearly 59,500 candidates were affected by such lapses, but its response to such concerns was limited to postponements and rescheduling of exams, without fixing accountability for the systemic breakdown.

The petition also draws attention to the fact that in 2018, following irregularities in the SSC CGL/CHSL 2017 examinations, the Supreme Court had set up a committee chaired by former judge Justice GS Singhvi to recommend safeguards for future examinations. The report of that committee, however, has never been made public.

The petitioner was represented by advocates Saurav Agrawal, Radhika Chawla, Gauhar Mirza, Abiha Zaidi, Suriti Chowdhary, Pritam Raman Giriya, and Anuj Manoj Bhave.

[Read Order]