Statutory recruitment rules remain binding on selection processes until declared unconstitutional by a competent court.

The applicants, qualified medical professionals with postgraduate (MD) degrees, challenged the eligibility criteria for the post of Lecturer/Assistant Professor in various medical colleges.

Under the J Medical Education (Gazetted) Service Recruitment Rules, 1979, Schedule-II requires two years of teaching experience as a Registrar or Demonstrator but explicitly excludes experience gained during postgraduate studies.

Conversely, the Medical Council of India (MCI) Regulations, 1998, recognize three years of Junior Residency (during PG) and one year of Senior Residency as sufficient experience.

The J Public Service Commission (PSC) issued Advertisement Notification No. 01-PSC (DR-P) of 2018, adhering to the 1979 State Rules, which rendered the applicants ineligible as their PG experience was discounted.

The applicants sought to declare the State Rules ultra vires to the MCI Regulations and challenged the advertisement.

The matter was transferred from the High Court of Jammu Kashmir to the Central Administrative Tribunal.

1. Whether Schedule-II of the JK Medical Education (Gazetted) Service Recruitment Rules, 1979, is ultra vires the MCI Regulations, 1998, regarding the exclusion of teaching experience gained during postgraduate studentship.

2. Whether the JK PSC is bound to follow the eligibility criteria prescribed by the executive recruitment rules over the MCI statutory regulations.

3. Whether the applicants have the standing to challenge the recruitment process despite failing to submit applications pursuant to the impugned advertisement.

The court primarily applied the principle that recruitment to public services must be conducted strictly in accordance with the statutory recruitment rules governing the field.

It emphasized that a recruiting agency, such as the Public Service Commission, lacks the authority to alter or reinterpret eligibility conditions prescribed by the employer department.

The court further applied the doctrine that statutory rules remain operational and binding on authorities until they are declared unconstitutional or invalid by a competent court.

It relied on the settled legal principle that a person who does not participate in a selection process is precluded from subsequently challenging the recruitment process or its eligibility conditions.

The Tribunal observed that the JK PSC, as a recruiting agency, is bound by the recruitment rules framed by the State Government and cannot modify qualifications independently.

Although the applicants argued that the 1979 Rules were inconsistent with the MCI Regulations, the Tribunal noted that it cannot "rewrite or modify" statutory rules through judicial review unless those rules are formally struck down by a competent court.

Since the 1979 Rules expressly exclude experience gained during postgraduate studies, the PSC acted within its mandate by incorporating those exact terms into the 2018 advertisement.

The Tribunal highlighted a procedural bar: the applicants admittedly did not apply for the positions advertised, which disentitles them from challenging the selection criteria post-facto.

The court found no evidence of arbitrariness or illegality in the PSC’s adherence to the existing statutory framework.

The court directy answered that the eligibility criteria in the advertisement were valid as they mirrored the existing statutory rules, and the applicants, having not participated in the selection process, could not maintain the challenge.

No relief was granted to the applicants, and no order as to costs was made.