By Nazmin Saikia
The SSC Selection Post Phase‑13 recruitment exam, held between July 24 and August 1, 2025, was meant to be a routine central recruitment exercise. Instead, it turned into a national controversy marked by abrupt cancellations, technical failures, and widespread anger among aspirants.
Within days, hashtags like #SSCMisManagement, #JusticeForAspirants, and #SSCVendorFailure trended across social media (Times of India, 2025). Demonstrations erupted at Jantar Mantar and across several states, with protesters alleging that the Staff Selection Commission (SSC) had failed to ensure a fair and glitch‑free exam process.
Case Stories
For many aspirants, this wasn’t just an exam—it was the culmination of years of preparation, savings, and personal sacrifice.
Shalini, a graduate from Jaipur, was assigned a test centre in the Andaman & Nicobar Islands—over 2,000 km away. Unable to afford the travel, she was forced to skip the exam (Moneycontrol, 2025).
Ravi Kumar travelled overnight to his UP centre only to find the biometric systems down. His exam was “postponed indefinitely” with no clear re‑test date (Indian Express, 2025).
Educator Neetu Singh (“Neetu mam”) joined the protests after receiving hundreds of messages from distressed students. She claimed the chaos had “mentally broken” many aspirants (Economic Times, 2025).
In Delhi’s Pawan Ganga and UP’s Educasa centres, technical failures resulted in the complete cancellation of sessions, affecting around 2,500 candidates (India Today, 2025).
For some, this was their last attempt before crossing the upper age limit; for others, it meant delaying life plans and facing family pressure.
Vendor Choices
In 2025, SSC switched from Tata Consultancy Services (TCS) to Eduquity Career Technologies, which quoted ₹220 per candidate compared to TCS’s ₹350. Critics flagged Eduquity’s past controversies in recruitment exams, but SSC said the tender process was transparent and Eduquity was not officially blacklisted (OpIndia, 2025).
Technical Failures
Candidates reported:
System freezes & server lag
Malfunctioning input devices
Biometric mismatches are blocking entry
Allotment of exam centres in distant states
About 55,000 complaints were filed during Phase 13—around 18% of total candidates (OpIndia, 2025).
Industry Patterns
SSC has faced repeated controversies, including the CGL 2024 “normalisation scam” (EdexLive, 2024) and the West Bengal SSC teacher recruitment scandal (Wikipedia, 2025).
Legal Frameworks
The Public Examinations (Prevention of Unfair Means) Act, 2024 (Wikipedia, 2024), addresses cheating and leaks but does little to cover large‑scale systemic disruptions caused by administrative or vendor failure.
Policy Perspective
Vendor Vetting: Disqualify vendors with prior controversies; factor reliability over lowest cost.
Technical Stress Testing: Conduct pre‑exam simulations in multiple states to detect weaknesses.
Geographic Centre Matching: Allocate centres nearest to aspirants’ home districts.
Grievance Redressal: Launch a dedicated real‑time complaints portal with timelines for resolution.Independent Oversight: Set up an autonomous examination regulatory authority for audits.
Legal Expansion: Amend the 2024 Act to penalise negligent mismanagement alongside deliberate malpractice.
The SSC Phase‑13 disruptions are not just an operational mishap—they are a breach of public trust. For millions, these exams are not simply tests—they are a pathway to stability, dignity, and a better life.
When recruitment systems fail, they not only waste candidates’ time and money but also erode the credibility of public institutions. Reforming the process—through accountability, transparency, and resilience—is essential to restore faith in one of India’s most critical employment pipelines.
As protests continue, the demand from aspirants is clear: conduct exams that respect the effort, time, and future of every candidate.
No comments:
Post a Comment