The Supreme Court held that the eligibility criteria requiring AICTE approval for universities were contrary to established legal principles. It ruled that disqualifying candidates from AICTE-exempt universities was improper and directed a fresh selection process based on revised eligibility criteria that conform to its previous rulings.

The Supreme Court addressed the cancellation of Bihar's Junior Engineer recruitment process initiated under a 2019 advertisement. The court found fault with the disqualification of candidates from AICTE-exempt universities, thereby directing a fresh selection process.

Introduction and Background (Para 1-3)

The present case arises from a batch of appeals challenging the 2019 recruitment for Junior Engineers in Bihar. The appellants, successful candidates in the recruitment process, appealed against the cancellation of the recruitment process by the State Government following a series of legal disputes concerning the eligibility of candidates.

Issue of Eligibility Criteria (Para 4-7)

The case's core issue revolves around the eligibility criteria under the Bihar Water Resources Department's Recruitment Rules (2017 Amendment), which mandated AICTE approval for candidates' institutions. The writ petitioners, who had degrees from universities not recognized by AICTE but approved by UGC, challenged this on the basis of the Bharathidasan University vs. AICTE judgment, which exempts universities from AICTE approval.

Legal Disputes and Cancellation of the Process (Para 8-12)

Several writ petitions were filed, leading the Bihar government to withhold results and eventually cancel the recruitment process after concluding that the existing rules contained anomalies. The High Court had permitted the state to amend the rules and re-advertise the posts, leading to the current appeal.

Arguments from Both Sides (Para 13-17)

The appellants argued that the cancellation was arbitrary and amounted to changing the rules after the selection process. They cited prior judgments that disallow altering recruitment criteria post-selection. On the other hand, the Bihar government justified the cancellation based on the legal irregularities in the eligibility rules.

Supreme Court’s Ratio and Decision (Para 18-30)

The Supreme Court found that the original recruitment rules were inconsistent with its earlier decisions, specifically regarding AICTE's non-requirement for universities. It directed the Bihar government and BTSC to prepare a fresh selection list in line with its observations, including candidates who were wrongly disqualified for not having AICTE approval.

Acts and Sections Discussed:

1. All India Council for Technical Education (AICTE) Act, 1987
   • Exemption of Universities from AICTE approval for technical courses.
2. Bihar Water Resources Department Subordinate Engineering (Civil) Cadre Recruitment Rules, 2017
   • Contested rule regarding AICTE approval requirement.
3. Judgment Reference:
   • Bharathidasan University & Anr. vs. AICTE & Ors. (2001) 8 SCC 676

Subjects:

Recruitment Cancellation, Judicial Review, AICTE Exemption

Junior Engineer Recruitment, Bihar Government, AICTE, Bharathidasan Judgment, Technical Education, Recruitment Rules