Supreme Court Holds That AICTE Career Advancement Regulations Do Not Apply to Direct Recruitment of Professors Under State Recruitment Rules and Candidates Cannot Challenge Selection Criteria After Participating

Held: The Supreme Court held that the AICTE (Career Advancement Scheme for Teachers and Other Academic Staff in Technical Institutions) Regulations, 2012 do not apply to the process of direct recruitment of Professors conducted by a State Public Service Commission under State recruitment rules, and that a candidate who participates in a selection process based on interview criteria without protest is estopped from challenging the method of selection after being declared unsuccessful.

Summary: The dispute arose from recruitment initiated in 2015 by the Gujarat Public Service Commission for appointment of Professors in Government Engineering Colleges, including one post of Professor (Plastic Engineering), to be filled under the Government Engineering Colleges Recruitment Rules, 2012 through interview-based assessment. The respondent candidate participated in the interview, secured marks below the prescribed cut-off, and was not recommended for appointment. After her failure, she challenged the selection by invoking AICTE Career Advancement Regulations, contending that the interview-only process violated the regulatory framework. While the Single Judge dismissed the writ petition holding the candidate bound by the selection criteria and expert assessment, the Division Bench allowed the appeal and invalidated the recruitment by applying AICTE Regulations. The Supreme Court examined the scheme, object, and statutory foundation of the AICTE Regulations and held that they are promotion and career progression norms applicable only to incumbent teachers under the Career Advancement Scheme and not recruitment rules governing initial appointments. The Court further emphasised that the AICTE Regulations and State recruitment rules operate in distinct fields and that judicial review cannot be used to reopen a concluded recruitment process years later.

Decision: The appeal was allowed, the judgment of the Division Bench of the Gujarat High Court dated 20.08.2025 was set aside, the recruitment conducted pursuant to the advertisement dated 23.09.2015 was upheld, the order of the learned Single Judge dismissing the writ petition was restored, and no order as to costs was made, with all pending applications disposed of.