IN THE MATTER OF HOWARD SHAFER, AS PRESIDENT &C., ET AL., RESPONDENTS, v.
  EDWARD V. REGAN, AS COMPTROLLER OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, ET AL., APPELLANTS,
  ET AL., RESPONDENTS.

    80 N.Y.2d 1006, 607 N.E.2d 803, 592 N.Y.S.2d 656 (1992).
    November 24, 1992

   3 No. 255
   Decided November 24, 1992
     _________________________________________________________________

   This memorandum is uncorrected and subject to revision before
   publication in the New York Reports.

   Lew A. Millenbach, for Appellants.
   Peter Henner, for Respondents Deitz, et al.
   Nancy L. Burritt, for Respondent Shafer.

   MEMORANDUM:

   The order of the Appellate Division should be affirmed, with costs.

   We agree with the Appellate Division that the impracticability of
   competitive testing for the position of Municipal Financial Analyst
   was not established. Nor did the record disclose any different or
   additional qualifications which would distinguish Municipal Financial
   Analysts from auditors placed in the competitive class. There was
   therefore no rational basis for the wholesale exemption of all
   Municipal Financial Analysts from civil service competitive
   examination (cf., Matter of Grossman v Rankin, 43 NY2d 493, 506 (Court
   should not interfere where an argument can be made for either
   classification)). However, we do not join with the Appellate Division
   in suggesting that, assuming the existence of some additional
   qualifications for which it is impracticable to test, the Commission
   still would have been required to try to find a "middle ground"
   position. We express no view regarding the validity of the rule
   established in Matter of Condell v Jorling (151 AD2d 88).

   * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

   Order affirmed, with costs, in a memorandum. Acting Chief Judge Simons
   and Judges Kaye, Titone, Hancock, Bellacosa and Smith concur.