Shortlisting candidates on higher experience criteria is valid where an advertisement allows reasonable screening of a large applicant pool.

Where an advertisement permits restricting the number of candidates to a reasonable limit when applications are numerous, shortlisting on the basis of qualifications and experience higher than the minimum prescribed is a legitimate screening method. The Commission's use of a four-year experience criterion, instead of the minimum three years, was a rational threshold for narrowing the field of consideration. The shortlisting was therefore valid, and the Tribunal erred in disapproving it; the selection process was not liable to be remitted for fresh processing on that ground.

---

---

Issues: Whether the Commission was entitled to shortlist candidates for interview by applying a higher experience criterion than the minimum qualification prescribed in the advertisement.

Analysis: The advertisement itself permitted restriction of the number of candidates to a reasonable limit where applications were numerous, either on the basis of qualifications and experience higher than the minimum prescribed or by holding a screening test. The shortlisting was founded on a rational criterion, namely four years' experience instead of the minimum three years' experience. Such screening at the threshold of selection is a recognised and legitimate method to narrow the field of consideration when the number of applicants is large.

Conclusion: The shortlisting was valid and the Tribunal erred in disapproving it; the selection process could not be remitted for fresh processing on that basis.

---