- (1.) Leave granted. Heard parties.
(2.) The tribunal has dismissed the appellant's application only on the ground that the appellant had acquired the working experience of one year prior to acquisition of the basic qualifications which in this case is diploma in Automobile Engineering. For this purpose, the tribunal relied upon the circularissued by the government. The rules, namely, the Motor Vehicles Department (Recruitment) Rules, 1991 framed under Article 309 of the Constitution show that a mere possession of the working experience of at least one year in a reputed Automobile Workshop as mentioned under Rule 3 (c) is enough. The rule does not make any difference between acquisition of such experience prior to or after the acquisition of the basic qualification. What is further, the record shows that even after the acquisition of the basic qualification as mentioned in Rule 3 (c) , the appellant has acquired the additional experience of one year in a reputed Automobile Workshop as required even by the said circular. The tribunal has committed an error in relying upon the circular which cannot replace the rules framed under Article 309 of the Constitution. We are, therefore, of the view that the tribunal's decision is incorrect. Since the appellant satisfies the qualifications required by the rules, the decision of the tribunal has to be set aside. We accordingly set aside the impugned decision of the tribunal and direct the respondent to consider the appellant for appointment, if otherwise he satisfies the requisite qualifications including the marks obtained in the written test and the interview already held. The appeal is allowed with no order as to costs.;