R. PAL, J. ( 1 ) THE petitioners are all sub-Assistant Engineers in the Mechanical Division of the Public Health Engineering Directorate. One of their grievances before the West Bengal Administrative Tribunal was that they had been wrongly denied the right to participate in an interview held by the State Public Service Commission in November 1994 for appointment to the post of Assistant Engineers (Mechanical) in the Directorate. Their writ application which was filed in December 1994 was transferred to the Tribunal under the Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985. An interim order was passed on 30th September 1996 directing the respondents not fill any more posts of Assistant Engineers till the disposal of the application. The application was ultimately dismissed by the Tribunal on 13th January 1998. ( 2 ) AS the facts of the case have been fully set out in the judgment of my learned brother S. N. Bhattacharya, J. it is not necessary to set out the same in extensor again. Only those facts, which are relevant to the particular issue, which I wish to address viz. the process of selection by the Public Service Commission, are briefly noted. ( 3 ) THE arbitrariness in the process followed by the Public Service Commission (PSC) in the selection of Assistant Engineers (Mechanical) is evident from the outset. ( 4 ) APPLICATIONS for appointment to the post of Assistant Engineer in the West Bengal Public Health Engineering Service were called for in an advertisement published on 12th June 1993. The advertisement provided for minimum qualifications which each of the petitioners fulfilled. The advertisement also provided:"the prescribed 'essential qualifications are minimum and more possession of the same does not entitle candidates to be called in for interview. Where the number of applications received in response to the advertisement is large and it will not be convenient or possible for the Commission to interview all those candidates, the Commission may restrict the number of candidates for interview to a reasonable limit on the basis of qualifications and experience higher than the minimum prescribed in the advertisement or by holding a screening test. " ( 5 ) IT is clear that the PSC had not provided for the holding of a competitive written examination at all. " ( 5 ) IT is clear that the PSC had not provided for the holding of a competitive written examination at all. ( 6 ) THE Recruitment Rules of the Public Health Directorate framed under Article 309 of the Constitution of India on 20th February 1988 provided inter alia for appointment to the post of Assistant Engineers (Mechanical/electrical ). The rule provided for 60% appointment by direct recruitment and 40% by promotion from amongst Sub-Assistant Engineers (Mechanical)/sub-Assistant Engineers (Electrical)/electrical Supervisor by selection through the State Public Service Commission. We are here concerned with the 60% direct recruits. The relevant extract of the rule reads:" (A) 60% of the total posts of Assistant Engineer (Permanent and temporary taken together) shall be filled up by direct recruitment on the results of a competitive examination to be conducted by the Public Service Commission, West Bengal provided that the Governor may fill up in the exigencies of the Public Service vacant posts of Assistant Engineer in the direct recruitment quota by Selection through Public Service Commission, West Bengal after advertisement and interview instead of by a competitive examination. " ( 7 ) THE qualifications for direct recruitment specified in the rules were:"qualifications for direct recruitment Essential: a degree in Mechanical/electrical Engineering of a recognised University or equivalent qualifications, desirable; one year's post-graduate practical training or study or research or practical engineering experience," ( 8 ) THESE rules were reproduced in the Recruitment Rules framed in 1994. ( 9 ) RULE 6 (a) quoted above categorically provides for direct recruitment on the result of a competitive examination to be conducted by the PSC unless the Governor allowed direct recruitment by selection through PSC only after advertisement and interview. Admittedly, no order had been passed by the Governor allowing the PSC to select candidates only by advertisement and interview. The PSC was therefore incompetent to select candidates for direct recruitment on that basis. ( 10 ) THE submission of the respondents is that since the petitioners had applied pursuant to the advertisement they could not complain that no competitive examination was held. In my opinion, the petitioners cannot be expected to have any knowledge of whether or not the Governor had exercised powers under Rule 6 (a) of the Recruitment Rules before they applied. It would be unreasonable to expect this from them. They cannot as a result be debarred from raising the issue. In my opinion, the petitioners cannot be expected to have any knowledge of whether or not the Governor had exercised powers under Rule 6 (a) of the Recruitment Rules before they applied. It would be unreasonable to expect this from them. They cannot as a result be debarred from raising the issue. ( 11 ) THE Governor's power under Rule 6 (a) is limited by the "exigencies of the Public Service". There is no case of any exigency made out by the PSC. The requisition to the PSC had been sent by the Department of Health and Family Welfare for appointment of Assistant Engineers (Mechanical) on 15th April 1993. The advertisement was issued on 12th June 1993 and the interviews were held in the end of November 1994 almost a year and half later. The PSC has affirmed an affidavit in which it was said that the reason for doing away with the competitive examination was because the syllabi for the competitive examinations were yet to be finalized. There was no reason for doing away with the competition examination altogether particularly given the time frame within which the PSC had acted. ( 12 ) THE second reason given by the PSC is even more difficult to comprehend. It was said that on the last few occasions it had received a few hundred applications for the post of Assistant Engineers (Civil) and:"as it would not have been feasible to interview such a large number of candidates, the Commission held preliminary Written Test to screen and restrict the number of candidates for interview for the post of Assistant Engineer (Civil ). " ( 13 ) THIS clearly shows that even when there were hundreds of applications the PSC held a written test for screening the candidates. But this course of action was not followed in the case of Assistant Engineers (Mechanical) although the PSC has said that for the two general vacancies 127 applications had been received. No reason is forthcoming why the course of action which was followed in the case of Assistant Engineers Civil) was not followed in the case of Assistant Engineer (Mechanical ). ( 14 ) THE written examination has always been considered to be a satisfactory method of objectively assessing comparative merits of candidates even for the purpose of screening or selection. It also pre-empts any allegation of arbitrariness or bias. ( 14 ) THE written examination has always been considered to be a satisfactory method of objectively assessing comparative merits of candidates even for the purpose of screening or selection. It also pre-empts any allegation of arbitrariness or bias. The Supreme Court in Ashok Kumar Yadav and Ors. v. State of Haryana and Ors. : (1985) 4 SCC 417 allowed the PSC to short list the candidates on the basis of the results of the written examinations. ( 15 ) AS far as candidates for the post of Assistant Engineer (Mechanical) the PSC conducted the screening only on the basis of academic attainments. The PSC has said, "as experience was not an essential qualification for the post, no weightage was given on that count". Incidentally each of the petitioners has more than 20 years experience in the field. According to PSC as the petitioners did not satisfy the assessment level fixed which was calculated on their academic record, they were not called for the interview. ( 16 ) THIS was not a rational method of screening candidates at all. More so in this case, where the recruitment rules themselves provide experience as a desirable qualification for direct recruitment to the post of Assistant Engineer. The PSC erred in proceeding on the basis (as stated in their affidavit)"that there was no provision in the recruitment rules for giving extra benefit and weightage to have over the other candidates. To have assessed the presentability of the candidates on the basis of academic qualifications was to confuse past achievement with contemporary merit. That experience is a relevant criteria for short-listing candidates has been held by the Supreme Court in the case of Madhya Pradesh Public Service Commission v. Navnit Kumar Potdar and Ors. : (1994) 6 SCC 293 . ( 17 ) PSC has relied on Rule 18 of the West Bengal Public Service Commission Rules or Procedure 1982 to justify its action. In my view Rule 18, far from justifying the Commission's actions, underlines the illegality of the procedure followed. Rule 18 provides:"the commission may at its discretion call for interview a limited number of candidates either in case of promotion or of selection after advertisement. Such preliminary selection will be made on a scrutiny (i) of confidential character rolls in case of promotion and (ii) of the stated qualifications and experience in case of selection. Rule 18 provides:"the commission may at its discretion call for interview a limited number of candidates either in case of promotion or of selection after advertisement. Such preliminary selection will be made on a scrutiny (i) of confidential character rolls in case of promotion and (ii) of the stated qualifications and experience in case of selection. " ( 18 ) IN undertaking the preliminary selection for short listing the candidates therefore the PSC had to take into consideration not only the stated qualifications but also experience in the case of direct recruits. For the reasons aforesaid I have no hesitation in concurring with the decision of my Learned Brother that the writ application must be allowed and the entire selection process to the post of Assistant Engineer (Mechanical/electrical) set aside. Let Xerox plain copies of this order duly countersigned by the Assistant Registrar (Court) be made available to learned Advocates appearing for the parties on usual undertakings. Writ Application allowed