AICTE rules for mode of appointments to technical institutes prevail over State rules: Kerala High Court

A three-judge Bench of the Kerala High Court recently ruled that the regulations prescribed by the All India Council for Technical Education (AICTE) for the mode of appointment for teaching staff in technical institutions would prevail over State rules [Ajal Ramakrishnan & ors v Athira & ors]..A Bench of Acting Chief Justice A Muhamed Mustaq, and Justices Shoba Annamma Eapen and S Manu noted that education (including technical education) fell under the concurrent list of legislative subjects under the Constitution of India. This means that both the Central government and States can make laws on this subject. However, if there is a conflict, the Central law would prevail according to Article 246 of the Constitution.In view of this, the High Court held that the AICTE's requirements for recruiting staff to technical institutions would prevail over conflicting provisions on this aspect by the State."We are of the view that the regulation framed under the Central enactment would prevail over the Rules framed under the Kerala Public Service Act," the Court said..It further affirmed that the AICTE has powers to prescribe the method of staff recruitment, even if this function is not expressly provided for under the All India Council for Technical Education Act, 1987 (AICTE Act).The Court reasoned that AICTE's role of monitoring the quality of educational standards in technical institutes is also tied to how staff are recruited. For instance, direct recruitment methods are likely to attract more meritorious talent, the Court explained. "If the method of appointment would have a bearing on standards of learning to be imparted in technical education, the court cannot say that such a prescription of the method of appointment is beyond the power of AICTE. While, it may be true that AICTE Act does not explicitly grant authority to prescribe mode of appointment in technical institution, the ACITE believes that the method of appointment is integral to the quality of education to be imparted in a technical institution, the court cannot judicially review the wisdom of an expert body," the Court concluded..The Court passed the ruling on a reference by a Division Bench which doubted the correctness of two earlier judgements, namely Suresh v State of Kerala (2021 (1) KLT 566) and Haridas v Athira (2021 (1) KLT 546).In both these cases, it was held that AICTE had the authority to prescribe not only the qualifications for teaching staff but also the method of appointment.A Division Bench of the Court, however, was of the view that the method of appointment has nothing to do with the standard of education and that only the latter aspect was the AICTE's prerogative. It, therefore, referred the matter to a larger Bench. .The question before the Court was whether rules prescribed under the Kerala Public Service Act, 1968 [Kerala Technical Education Service (Amendment) Rules, 2010] or a 2019 notification [containing the Technical Education (Diploma) Regulation, 2019] issued by the AICTE would prevail when it comes to the mode of recruiting teaching staff to technical institutes. The 2019 notification laid down that the post of lecturer to technical institutions was to be filled exclusively through direct recruitment. This conflicted with Kerala’s Technical Education Service (Amendment) Rules, 2010, which allowed a ratio of 13:7 between direct recruitment and appointments by transfer..By its September 12 ruling, the three-judge Bench has concluded that the AICTE’s regulations, being a Central law, would prevail over the State rules when it comes to matters concerning technical education.The Bench proceeded to uphold the legal principles established in the Suresh and Haridas cases and answered the reference accordingly. .Advocates P Nandakumar and Amrutha Sanjeev appeared for certain petitioners.Advocates Raghul Sudheesh, KJ Glaxon, J Lakshmi and Amal Jees Alex appeared for respondents.Advocate Sajith Kumar V represented the AICTE..[Read Order]