The agreement reached between the Jharkhand government and the students protesting over the recruitments done by Jharkhand Public Service Commission (JPSC) and Jharkhand Staff Selection Commission (JSSC) issue is welcome. The cancellation of the JSSC-CGL (Combined Graduate Level) and examinations conducted by the private outsourcing agency TSR Data Processing Private Limited (TDPL), along with the decision to investigate irregularities in recruitments made since 2014, is a significant achievement of the sustained student movement. The CPI(M) congratulates the students and job aspirants for their determined struggle and welcomes the positive approach adopted by the Hemant Soren government. These decisions have come after 24 days of continuous protest and growing public pressure.

EXAMS SINCE 2014 UNDER REVIEW

The decision is not limited to one or two examinations. In view of the irregularities, malpractice and the questionable role of the examination agency TDPL that emerged during the CID investigation and in the reports submitted by the SIT, the state government’s Personnel Department issued eight separate notifications late on 18 August. More than 22 recruitment examinations have been completely cancelled, six examinations have been kept suspended until further orders, and 17 previously conducted examinations have been ordered to undergo CID investigation. This wide-ranging action points to serious problems within the recruitment system and gives concrete shape to the pressure exerted by the student movement.

The decision to investigate irregularities in appointments going back to 2014 is also an important step towards establishing accountability for the failures and malpractice that have occurred during this period.

The movement has demonstrated that sustained and democratic mobilisation can compel governments to address genuine public grievances. Along with SFI, DYFI and other democratic organisations also played an important role in this broad mobilisation and consistently raised the issues of recruitment, employment and students’ rights.

GENUINE VS GUILTY

The government’s decision also marks the beginning of a difficult but necessary next phase - to hold those actually responsible for irregularities accountable while ensuring that genuine candidates do not become victims of the process. In the JSSC-CGL case, the Jharkhand High Court had considered the principle of segregation, that is, determining individual responsibility by distinguishing candidates against whom specific allegations existed from other successful candidates. The Supreme Court had also not interfered with this approach.

Now that the examinations and selection process have been cancelled, this principle becomes even more important. Around 2,000 candidates were appointed through the JSSC-CGL. It would be unreasonable to assume that all of them secured employment through malpractice or misconduct. The investigation must establish individual responsibility rather than treating every successful candidate as guilty.

In a sense, the government has left the question of appointments already made to the judicial process while simultaneously opening the way for a broader investigation into irregularities since 2014. It is now essential that the CID and other investigative processes proceed in an impartial, time-bound and credible manner, and that those responsible are clearly identified. Wherever necessary, the demand for an independent investigation should also be seriously considered.

BJP’S FAKE DEBATE

The BJP’s reaction to the agreement also exposes its political unease. For a long time, there has been an attempt to portray a CBI investigation as the only legitimate outcome of the movement. The student movement has now secured important decisions from the state government. The demand for an investigation, however, should be pursued on the basis of evidence and credibility. Turning the issue merely into a political debate between the CBI and CID cannot substitute for strengthening the recruitment system or establishing individual responsibility.

There is also a need to investigate the role of the commercial ecosystem built around competitive examinations, particularly the coaching industry. The possibility that interests benefiting from the repeated conduct and cancellation of examinations, or those seeking to serve their own interests, may attempt to influence the ‘CBI or CID’ debate cannot be ruled out. This aspect also deserves serious investigation.

The immediate achievement belongs to the students who maintained sustained pressure through their struggle. The challenge now is to ensure that the government’s commitments are implemented, fundamental reforms are made in recruitment institutions, and the interests of genuine candidates are protected. The struggle has demonstrated its strength; the next goal must be to transform this victory into a transparent, credible and accountable recruitment system in Jharkhand.