RAJESH KUMAR Vs. STATE OF HARYANA AND ANR.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioner, who is a practising Advocate at Civil Courts, Mohindergarh, has filed the instant petition for issuing direction to the respondents to call him for interview for the post of Manager (Legal), advertised by respondent No. 2 -Haryana State Industrial and Infrastructure Development Corporation Limited, vide advertisement Annexure P -l.

(2.) IN this case, in the month of September, 2008, vide advertisement Annexure P -l, four posts of Manager (Legal) were advertised, out of which two posts were reserved for the Scheduled Caste category, one post each was reserved for the Backward Class and Ex -Serviceman. For these posts, the following qualification and experience were required:

(3.) IN the written statement, filed on behalf of respondent No. 2, it has been stated that 33 applications were received for the aforesaid posts, out of which 9 candidates were shortlisted on the basis of the qualification and experience, prescribed for the post. Since the petitioner was found not having the requisite experience, therefore, he was not considered eligible to be called for interview. Regarding the unconstitutionality of the requisite experience, it has been stated that the employer is the best judge of his requirement. It is further averred that the experience required for the post in question cannot be said to be arbitrary and unconstitutional or violative of the right to equality in the matter of employment, as enshrined under Article 16 of the Constitution of India.