All India Council of Technical Education regulations do not apply to direct recruitments by state public service commissions, the Supreme Court has ruled.
Besides, a candidate who fails to challenge the (state commission) rules at the outset and participates in the selection process has no right to question these rules subsequently on their failure to get recruited, the bench of Justice P.S. Narasimha and Justice Alok Aradhe said.
The bench upheld the Gujarat State Public Service Commission’s appeal against a division bench judgment of Gujarat High Court that had invalidated the selection process on the grounds of its failure to follow AICTE regulations.
The division bench had set aside a single-judge ruling that said AICTE rules would not apply to the direct recruitment of Gnaneshwary Dushyant Kumari Shah.
The single judge had also said the candidate could not be allowed to challenge the selection rules after having participated in the process and failed to get recruited.
“The pivotal issue involved in this appeal is whether AICTE Regulations apply to the process of direct recruitment under the State Rules, conducted by the Commission, for filling up the post of Professors in Government Engineering Colleges in the State of Gujarat,” the apex court judgment said.
It said that applying the AICTE regulations to such a recruitment process “conducted by the Commission under State Rules framed by the State, would be to stretch the AICTE Regulations beyond its text, context, and purpose”.
The judgment, authored by Justice Aradhe, said the high court division bench had “committed an error in assuming that the AICTE Regulations override the State Recruitment Rules in the matter of initial
appointment”.
“The Act does not empower the AICTE to abolish the State Rules for recruitment in Government Colleges, but empowers it to ensure standard of education and service conditions, particularly for career progression,” it said.
“There is yet another fatal infirmity in the challenge to selection process at the behest of the candidate. The criteria for interview and qualifying marks were expressly stated. The candidate applied, appeared and took her chance. Only after being declared unsuccessful did she seek to invoke an entirely different regulatory regime.
“It is a settled principle that a candidate having participated in the process of selection, without protest, cannot challenge the Rules of the game after being declared unsuccessful.”
However, the judgment noted that the candidate did possess “substantial research credentials, international publications and technical expertise”.
“Yet, the fact remains that the courts do not make appointments. A recruitment concluded in 2015 cannot be reopened in 2025, on the basis of the Regulations that never applied to it,” it said.