S. Ravindra Bhat, J.:--

1. The Petitioner, an unsuccessful candidate for the post of Senior Scientific Officer Grade II (Ballistic) (hereafter referred to as “the post”) is aggrieved by the decision of the Central Administrative Tribunal (“CAT”) dated 11.05.2011 in O.A. No. 529/2011, repelling his challenge to the selection of the fourth respondent, Ms. Babita Gulia. He alleges that she does not fulfill the essential experience parameters advertised for the post.

2. The brief facts are that the Petitioner was recruited as Laboratory Assistant on 13.06.1996 under the second Respondent, the Director of the Central Forensic Science Laboratory (hereafter the “CFSL”). He was promoted to the post of Scientific Assistant on 23.08.1996. The third Respondent (the Union Public Service Commission, hereafter “UPSC”) issued a public advertisement in June 2009 inviting applications for the post. The prescribed educational qualification for the post was a Masters’ degree in mathematics or physics or chemistry from a recognized University or equivalent. The essential experience was three years’ in a laboratory in firearms and explosives. The Petitioner applied, and was called for the interview. Afte

Click Here to Read the rest of this document