Overall experience: Mixed Interview difficulty: High Interview length: Longer than initially communicated The interview process was technically strong and well designed. I genuinely enjoyed the discussions — they were deep, practical, and assessed real engineering skills rather than surface-level knowledge. Credit where it’s due: the interviewers were competent and the technical evaluation was solid. However, the process extended beyond what was initially communicated. What was supposed to be a limited number of rounds increased significantly, requiring additional time and commitment. More importantly, compensation expectations were discussed clearly early in the process. Based on those discussions, I committed fully and stepped away from other opportunities. At the offer stage, the compensation proposed was still generous, but lower than what had been previously discussed. While negotiation is normal, changing agreed expectations at the final stage was disappointing and impacted trust. Despite the offer being higher than another one I had, I chose to decline due to the late change in terms. Pros: Strong technical interview process Challenging and meaningful discussions Interviewers with good technical depth Cons: Interview rounds increased mid-process Compensation expectations changed at offer stage Misalignment between verbal commitments and final offer Advice to Management: Ensure clarity and consistency throughout the hiring process. Candidates invest significant time and make career decisions based on discussions during interviews. Honoring commitments builds trust and strengthens employer reputation.

Round 1: Write code for Parking lot system in .net core. Around 5 API are given, should implement them completely in given 1 hour. Round 2 : DSA like Find given strings are anagrams , Find all permutations of a string etc. Round 3 : HLD (design twitter) & DSA (find all possible paranthesys of size n)