Court rules that recruitment initiated before the Uttar Pradesh Education Service Selection Commission Act, 2023 remains valid, dismissing petition challenging appointment of Assistant Professors.
In a significant judgment delivered on May 29, 2026, the Allahabad High Court upheld the recruitment process for Assistant Professors at the Digambar Jain College, a minority educational institution, against challenges posed by the enactment of the Uttar Pradesh Education Service Selection Commission Act, 2023. The ruling was delivered by Justice Saurabh Shyam Shamshery, dismissing the petition filed by Sunil Kumar Jain, who questioned the validity of appointments made under the previous legal framework.
The case revolved around a series of writ petitions challenging the recruitment process initiated before the new Act was enforced. The petitioner, Sunil Kumar Jain, argued that the appointments were illegal following the enactment of the new legislation, which redefined the recruitment rules. The petition sought to have the recruitment conducted under the new Act, claiming the process was flawed due to the absence of a valid Committee of Management since 1999 and procedural irregularities.
The court, however, disagreed with the petitioner's assertions, emphasizing that the recruitment process had commenced with the issuance of advertisements prior to the enforcement of the new Act. Justice Shamshery noted that the "Repeal and Savings" clause within the Uttar Pradesh Education Service Selection Commission Act, 2023, protected processes initiated under the old rules. The court drew upon the Constitution Bench ruling in Tej Prakash Pathak v. Rajasthan High Court, asserting that the rules governing the recruitment process cannot be altered once the process has begun.
The judgment highlighted that the recruitment process started with advertisements published on August 8 and 12, 2023, before the new Act came into force on August 21, 2023. Despite the enactment of the new legislation, the court found that the recruitment process was validly commenced and completed under the provisions of the Uttar Pradesh Secondary Education Services Selection Board Act, 1982, which governed the procedure at the time.
Justice Shamshery dismissed the petition by Sunil Kumar Jain on procedural grounds, noting the non-joinder of necessary parties, namely the selected candidates. The court emphasized that selected candidates were already appointed and had joined their respective positions, thus making their inclusion essential to the proceedings.
The judgment also addressed interim orders that had halted the disbursement of salaries to the appointed candidates, rendering these orders non-est following the dismissal of the main petition. The court directed that the recruitment process, having been deemed valid, should continue without interruption, ensuring that the students of the institution are not deprived of teaching staff.
The decision underscores the judiciary's stance on maintaining the integrity of processes initiated under existing legal frameworks, even amidst legislative changes. It also highlights the importance of procedural compliance in judicial proceedings, particularly concerning the inclusion of affected parties in litigation.
Bottom line:-
Recruitment process begins with issuance of advertisement and ends with filling of notified vacancies. Rules applicable at the time of advertisement govern the selection, and the "Repeal and Savings" clause in new legislation protects the process initiated under the old rules.
Statutory provision(s): Uttar Pradesh Education Service Selection Commission Act, 2023, U.P. State Universities Act, 1973, U.P. Secondary Education Services Selection Board Act, 1982, Section 31 (Repeal and Savings) of the Uttar Pradesh Education Service Selection Commission Act, 2023.
Sunil Kumar Jain v. State of U.P., (All) : Law Finder Doc id # 2909949
