The High Court at Allahabad has ruled that employees of Public Sector Undertakings (PSUs), government companies, and teachers in educational institutions cannot claim their service as experience in a “Government Office” for the purpose of recruitment to the post of Assistant Registrar. Justice Saurabh Shyam Shamshery, presiding over a bunch of writ petitions, clarified that a “Government Office” refers strictly to offices under the direct control of the State or Union Government.
The legal issue centered on whether the 7-year experience requirement in a “Government Office,” as prescribed for the Uttar Pradesh University (Centralised) Service Assistant Registrar Examination-2024, could be satisfied by service in PSUs, government-owned corporations, or teaching positions. The court dismissed the majority of the petitions, holding that the employer is at liberty to provide a restricted interpretation of “Government Office” based on the needs of the post.
Background
The Uttar Pradesh Public Service Commission (UPPSC) issued Advertisement No. A-5/E-1/2024 on August 28, 2024, for the Assistant Registrar Examination. Under Rule 13 of the Uttar Pradesh State University (Centralised) Service Rules, 1975, the prescribed qualification included:
“किसी राजकीय कार्यालय या विश्वविद्यालय के कार्यालय में न्यूनतम 07 वर्ष का कार्य करने का अनुभव जिसके साथ अंग्रेजी तथा हिन्दी दोनों में आलेखन का ज्ञान तथा लेखा नियमों का ज्ञान हो” (Minimum 07 years of work experience in any Government Office or University Office, along with knowledge of drafting in both English and Hindi and knowledge of accounting rules).
A subsequent clarification by the State on June 19, 2025, specified that “Government Office” means an office of the State Government, and institutions of higher education must be those controlled by the State, other Provincial Governments, or the Government of India. The petitioners challenged the rejection of their candidatures despite having seven years of experience in various entities like Indian Airlines, UP Power Corporation, and various schools.
Court’s Analysis and Observations
The Court examined the nature of the petitioners’ employers to determine if they met the criteria of a “Government Office.”
On PSUs and Government Companies
In the lead case of Geeta Chandra vs. State of U.P., the petitioner served as Cabin Crew and a Senior Associate in Indian Air Lines Ltd. The Court observed:
“It may be a case of petitioner that Indian Air Lines Ltd., is a State instrumentality or a Public Sector Undertaking… but still in strict interpretation, it is not a Government Office under ‘State or Union’. The employer is at liberty to give a restricted interpretation of word ‘Government Office’ as per the need of the post.”
The Court further noted:
“An employee would be treated to be an employee of Government Office only if his employment is under direct control of State or Union Government.”
This reasoning was applied to dismiss petitions from employees of Uttar Pradesh Rajya Vidyut Utpadan Nigam Limited, Uttar Pradesh Rajkiya Nirman Nigam Ltd., and Uttar Pradesh Power Corporation Limited.
On Teachers and Educational Staff
Regarding petitioners working as teachers (Writ No. 3112 of 2026 and others), the Court relied on the Supreme Court judgment in Maharashtra Public Service Commission Vs. Sandeep Sriram Warade & Ors (2019) 6 SCC 362. It held that teaching experience cannot be considered as administrative experience in a government office for the post of Assistant Registrar.
On Contractual Employees
Dismissing the plea of a contractual EMIS Incharge (Writ No. 2289 of 2026), the Court stated:
“It is not disputed that a person working on contract cannot be considered to be a regular employee in a government office.”
The Decision
The Court categorized the outcomes based on the specific nature of the petitioners’ service:
- Dismissed: Petitions from employees of Indian Airlines, UP Power Corporation, UP Rajya Vidyut Utpadan Nigam, BSNL, Food Corporation of India, and various Banks were dismissed as these are “independent entities” or undertakings, not Government Offices.
- Dismissed: Petitions from Primary and Middle School teachers were dismissed.
- Remanded: The Court set aside rejections for employees of the Airports Authority of India, noting it is an “Office of Central Government,” and directed the respondents to reconsider their claims.
- Remanded for Clarification: In cases involving Teerthankar Mahaveer University (Private) and Defence Institute of Advanced Technology (Deemed University), the Court remanded the matters for fresh orders after seeking clarification on whether “University” in the rules includes private or deemed universities.
Case Details
- Case Title: Geeta Chandra Versus State of U.P. and another (and connected matters)
- Case No.: WRIT – A No. 1732 of 2026
- Bench: Justice Saurabh Shyam Shamshery
- Date: March 24, 2026
