Committee resolved to call for interview 24 most experienced applicants from profession i.e. practicing advocates and others (from list prepared in decreasing number of experience) belonging to unreserved category against 9 unreserved posts.  Petitioner filed petition challenging selection process for post of Member of Tribunal on the ground that process of selecting only few applicants for purposes of interview, while rejecting others without any intelligible differential being applied in classification was discriminatory and violative of article 14 of Constitution. Dismissing the petition the Court held that rule 4A of 1963 Rules empowers Selection Board to evolve its own procedure and aforesaid rule is not subject matter of challenge before Court. Therefore, decision of Committee to shortlist candidates was reasonable and not arbitrary.