SMT. ABHILASHA KUMARI, J. Rule. Mr. Maulik G. Nanavati, learned Assistant Government Pleader waives service of notice of Rule for respondent No. 1. Mr. D. G. Shukla, learned Counsel waives service of notice of Rule on behalf of respondent No.2. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and with the consent of the learned Counsel for the respective parties, the petition is being heard and finally decided today.

2. This petition under Art. 226 of the Constitution of India has been filed with a prayer to issue a writ of mandamus or an appropriate writ or direction, quashing and setting aside the impugned order dated 27-10-2010 (Annexure-D) issued by respondent No. 2, whereby the petitioner has been debarred from participating in the interview for the post of Deputy Director (Class-I), Tribal Development Department, Government of Gujarat, on the ground that he does not hold the requisite experience, as prescribed by the Rules. There is a further prayer to direct respondent No. 2 to issue a call letter to the petitioner for participation in the interview for the said post.

3. Briefly stated, the relevant facts of the case are that, advertisement No. 164 of 2006-2007 dated 15-8-2006, was issued by respondent No. 2 Gujarat Public Service Commission ("G.P.S.C.", for short), inviting applications for the post of Deputy Director (Class-I), Tribal Development Department from amongst the candidates possessing the requisite eligibility criteria as stipulated. Two posts were advertised, out of which one post was reserved for a candidate belonging to the Schedule Caste Category and the other post was meant for a candidate belonging to the Unreserved (General) Category. The petitioner belongs to the Socially and Educationally Backward Class (S.E.B.C.) Category. He submitted his application, along with copies of certificates regarding his educational qualifications and other credentials, and was permitted to appear in the Preliminary Test conducted by respondent No. 2, on 29-11-2008. The petitioner cleared the said Preliminary Test with the requisite qualifying norms, but as according to the G. P. S. C., he did not possess the required experience for the post, he was not called for the personal interview which was to be held on 15-3-2011. The said decision was conveyed to the petitioner by the impugned communication dated 27-10-2010. Aggrieved thereby, the petitioner has approached this Court by filing this petition.

4. Mr. H. S. Munshaw, learned Counsel for the petitioner has submitted :

(A) That the petitioner is highly qualified and is holding a degree in Bachelor of Rural Studies, with First Class. The petitioner has also obtained the qualification of Masters of Social Work (M.S.W.) with First Class. Thereafter, the petitioner was selected and appointed by Aga Khan Rural Support Programme (India), as a Community Organizer, with effect from 31-5-1996. The petitioner was later promoted to the post of Member Secretary in the said organisation, which post he is presently holding.

(B) That apart from the above qualifications, the petitioner has vast experience in Rural Development Programmes and Activities, since 1996. The requisite experience. as per the advertisement is three years of Social Work, as against which the petitioner is holding the experience of more than ten years.

(C) That the impugned decision of respondent No. 2 in holding that the petitioner is not qualified as he does not possess the necessary experience in Social Work is baseless, unjust and arbitrary, apart from being contrary to the evidence on record. No cogent reason has been assigned by respondent No. 2 for holding that the petitioner lacks the requisite experience, therefore, the impugned decision may be quashed and set aside and the petition allowed.

5. The petition has been contested by Mr. D. G. Shukla, learned Counsel for respondent No. 2 by filing an affidavit-in-reply, and submitting that though the petitioner possesses the requisite educational qualifi