Supremacy of Apex Central Regulations Limited to Their Intended Context

While central apex bodies like the AICTE possess statutory authority to lay down uniform standards that ordinarily prevail over inconsistent State prescriptions, this supremacy operates strictly within the domain intended by the regulations. The principle of federal supremacy in educational standards ensures national excellence and uniformity, but it does not grant central regulations unlimited reach beyond their explicit textual scope. Central regulations crafted for specific administrative purposes, such as career progression or internal quality control, cannot be forcibly applied to displace distinct State recruitment rules. State governments retain legitimate authority to conduct open competitive recruitments for State institutions through designated public service commissions under local rules. Where central standards and State rules operate in fundamentally different fields, the question of central regulations overriding or superseding State rules does not arise. Judicial review must guard against extending statutory regulations to subjects and entities not intended by the legislature or framing authority. Substantive statutory harmony is achieved by restricting central regulations to their true statutory field without encroaching on valid State selection mechanisms. (Gujarat Public Service Commission v. Gnaneshwary Dushyantkumar Shah & Ors. | 2026 INSC 70)