The recent Supreme Court decision to quash the recruitment of 1,158 professors and librarians in Punjab has sparked widespread debate in academic circles and among political observers. According to Hindustan Times The court’s ruling, which cited procedural violations and political motivations, has left hundreds of newly appointed teachers out of work and raised serious questions about government hiring practices in the state.
Background: A Four-Year Wait Ends Abruptly
The professors and librarians affected by this judgment were recruited during a 2021 drive by the Punjab government. This move was undertaken just ahead of the 2022 assembly elections and comprised appointments for 1,091 assistant professors and 67 librarians. For these candidates, the journey to secure appointment letters was already long and fraught with bureaucratic hurdles and legal battles. Many had only recently joined their respective government colleges after waiting years for the process to conclude, only to have their employment suddenly invalidated by the top court’s ruling.
The Legal Timeline: From Approval to Cancellation
The legality of the recruitment process was first challenged by guest teachers who were already working in Punjab’s educational institutions, setting off a protracted legal dispute. Initially, a single-judge bench of the Punjab and Haryana High Court struck down the recruitment, citing procedural flaws. However, in 2024 a High Court division bench reversed that decision, paving the way for the newly selected candidates to join their posts. This situation changed again on July 14, 2025, when the Supreme Court, led by Justices Sudhanshu Dhulia and K Vinod Chandran, overturned the division bench decision and ordered a fresh recruitment process in strict accordance with University Grants Commission (UGC) regulations.
Why the Supreme Court Intervened
Central to the Supreme Court’s intervention was the deviation from the established UGC selection process. According to the UGC, hiring for academic posts must be done through a combination of academic record evaluation and personal interviews. However, the Punjab government instead used a single, multiple-choice written test, claiming it would be more objective. The Supreme Court firmly disagreed, noting that Punjab had voluntarily adopted UGC regulations and was therefore required to adhere to the prescribed process.
The original proposal targeted 177 posts for colleges that had recently opened and required staff on an urgent basis. Over time, this number was significantly expanded to encompass 931 assistant professor and 50 librarian positions, many of which normally fall under the Punjab Public Service Commission’s domain. Bypassing the commission and due procedures not only violated UGC norms but also undermined the integrity of the recruitment process. Moreover, the entire drive took place just before the 2022 elections, leading the Supreme Court to observe that it served more to further political interests than the advancement of higher education. The judgment included a sharp criticism, stating that the process appeared driven by “narrow political gains.”
Impact on the Professors and Librarians
For the affected candidates, the judgment has upended months and years of effort. Many left previous positions and academic fellowships to accept what they believed were secure government jobs. Their disappointment has been expressed through collective action—united under the ‘1158 Front,’ these teachers and librarians are now urging the Punjab government to submit a review petition to the Supreme Court. The group has stated their commitment to continue their legal battle and to oppose any further orders that might permanently bar their employment.
Government and Political Reactions
This recruitment drive was initiated during the Congress-led government under Charanjit Singh Channi, which lost power to the Aam Aadmi Party (AAP) in the 2022 elections. The incoming AAP-led Punjab government expressed support for the recruited teachers in court, emphasizing the state’s rights in setting its own hiring policy. However, the Supreme Court reiterated that once a state voluntarily adopts UGC rules, it must follow them in all respects. Punjab’s minister for higher education has indicated that the government is considering a review petition but has yet to announce its official response or legal strategy.
Looking Ahead: The Next Chapter
This episode has drawn attention to the critical importance of transparent, rule-bound recruitment practices in state educational institutions. The Supreme Court’s verdict stands as a reminder that deviations from legal procedure—especially when timed around elections—can have far-reaching consequences. For Punjab’s education sector and the affected professors and librarians, the journey is not yet over, as review petitions and further legal reviews may still be on the horizon.
For more stories click here
Follow us for latest updates:
