Limits of Judicial Review in Academic Expert Evaluations

The scope of judicial review under Article 226 of the Constitution regarding candidate suitability assessed by an expert selection committee is extremely restricted. Selection committees composed of domain experts are uniquely equipped to evaluate candidate performance, professional capability, and interview suitability for academic posts. Courts do not possess the specialized expertise to re-evaluate interview performance, reassess candidate marks, or substitute their own judgment for that of an expert body. In the absence of established mala fides, procedural arbitrariness, or clear violation of mandatory statutory rules, courts must exercise judicial restraint regarding selection outcomes. The mere possession of high academic qualifications or research credentials by a candidate does not automatically entitle them to selection over the assessment of an expert panel. High Courts cannot act as appellate authorities over selection committees or direct appointments under the guise of exercising extraordinary writ powers. Judicial intervention is limited to ensuring that the selection process conformed to advertised criteria and basic principles of fairness. Respecting the autonomy of expert selection panels is crucial to maintaining academic standards in public institutions. (Gujarat Public Service Commission v. Gnaneshwary Dushyantkumar Shah & Ors. | 2026 INSC 70)