As per the case facts, the High Court invalidated a recruitment notification, interpreting that specific specializations were implied for certain subjects, such as History, even though the governing rules did ... not explicitly mention them for undergraduate qualifications. The appeal arose because the High Court extended its review beyond the explicit terms of the rule and the advertisement, focusing instead on unstated specializations. The question arose whether the High Court committed an error by not focusing solely on what the recruitment rule explicitly provided and whether the advertisement complied with it, choosing instead to delve into implicit specializations. Finally, the Supreme Court concluded that the High Court erred by not confining its review to the explicit provisions of the recruitment rule and the advertisement's compliance. The Supreme Court allowed the appeals, reversing the High Court's judgment and the administrative tribunal's order, noting that a stricter adherence to the fundamental principles of judicial review would have prevented this error.