Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
SAURABH SHYAM SHAMSHERY
Geeta Chandra – Appellant
Versus
State of U.P. – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
SAURABH SHYAM SHAMSHERY, J.
1. Heard Sri Ashok Khare, learned Senior Counsel assisted by Sri Siddharth Khare, Sri Kunal Shah and Sri Atul Kumar Shahi, Sri Lalit Kumar Srivastava, Sri Saksham Srivastava, Sri Vipul Pandey, Sri Neelabh Srivastava, Kritika Sinha, Sri Sunil Kumar Shukla, Sri Rahul Mishra, Sri Akhilesh Kumar Tiwari, Sri Hashim Khan, Sri Tarun Agarwal Senior Counsel assisted by Sri Prashant Mishra and Sri Anoop Baranwal, learned counsel for the petitioners, Sri Sanjeev Singh, Learned Senior Advocate and Additional Advocate General assisted by Sri Dhirendra Pratap Singh, learned Standing Counsel, Sri Avneesh Tripathi and Sri Sanjay Kumar Om on behalf of respondent Commission.
2. Uttar Pradesh Public Service Commission issued an Advertisement No.A-5/E-1/2024 dated 28.8.2024 for Uttar Pradesh University (Centralised) Service Assistant Registrar Examination-2024.
3. Petitioners in present bunch of writ petitions have applied in said Examination and are aggrieved that despite they have an experience of 7 years as required, still their respective candidature was rejected and respective appeals thereof were also rejected.
4. Applicable service Rules in present case is the
The court upheld that experience in non-Government entities does not qualify candidates for government positions as defined under applicable service rules.
The court established that candidates must provide clear evidence of relevant experience as per recruitment criteria, and subjective interpretations are not permissible.
The court held that procedural strictness in recruitment must be balanced with fairness, allowing exceptions for valid experience certificates issued by authorized personnel even if not counter signe....
The main legal point established in the judgment is the importance of eligibility on the cut-off date and the principle of estoppel in relation to the eligibility criteria for government appointments....
(1) Appointment – Mode of employment is not the primary concern – Primary concern is nature of work performed and whether work undertaken by candidate has any nexus with purported work to be undertak....
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
