M. Katju, J. - (1.) HEARD learned counsel for the parties.
(2.) THIS special appeal has been filed against the impugned judgment dated 4.10.2002. The facts in details are given in the judgment of the learned single Judge and hence we are not repeating the same. It appears that an advertisement was issued by the U. P. Public Service Commission dated 16.7.1999 inviting applications for selection to the post of Regional Inspector (Technical) and Assistant Regional Inspector (Technical) in the Transport Department, U. P. Government. Para 5 of the advertisement provided for the essential qualification for the post. This includes practical experience of at least five years in a large automobile workshop. The candidature of the writ petitioner was rejected on the ground that he did not possess five years experience in a large automobile workshop.
(3.) THE learned single Judge has allowed the writ petition on the ground that the U. P. Transport (Subordinate)Technical Service Rules, 1980, which requires five years experience in a large automobile workshop has been superseded by the statutory notification dated 12.6.1989 issued by the Central Government under Section 213(4) of the Motor Vehicles Act. That notification has been quoted in the Judgment of the learned single Judge. Clause 3 of the qualification therein required working experience of at least one year in a reputed workshop. There is no dispute that the writ petitioner has more than one year experience in a reputed workshop. Hence, in our opinion under the notification of the 1989 he is qualified.;