Judgment Birendra Prasad Sinha, J. 1. This is an application under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for the issuance of a writ of certiorari quashing the orders contained in Annexures 7 and 8. By Annexure 7, which is a letter from the District Education Officer, Bhagalpur, daed the 13th April, 1978, the petitioner as well as the Secretary of the T. N. High School, Rangra, were informed that Shyam Chandra Jha (respondent No.5) had been permitted to work as the Incharge Head Master of the School. Annexure 8 is a Government order, dated the 25th July, 1977, regarding the appointment and promotion of head masters and assistant head master in non-Government high schools. 2. T. N. High School, Rangra, was established in the year 1967. The petitioner joined the school as assistant teacher on 1st March, 1967. The school got partial recognition in 1969 and full recognition in the year 1976. The petitioner passed his B. Sc. examination in the year 1966 and got trained in the year 1972. According to the petitioner, respondent No.5 joined this school on 9th July, 1970. He had passed his M. A. examination and had got a diploma in education. According to the petitioner, the service of respondent No.5 was approved on 19th October, 1974 although the managing committee had never recommended the name of respondent No.5 for approval. The petitioner claims that he was appointed as acting Head Master in place of one Parmanand Singh by a resolution of the managing committee dated 11th December, 1977. The resolution appointing the petitioner as acting Head Master was referred to the Sub-divisional Education Officer, who forwarded it to the District Education Officer along with a representation of respondent No.5. Respondent No.5, it may be stated, had represented against the resolution of the managing committee. The petitioner was surprised to receive a letter from the District Education Officer, dated 13th april, 1973, contained in Annexure 7, communicating him that respondent no.5 had been allowed to function as the Incharge Head Master by the board and the charge should be handed over to him. According to the petitioner, the post of teachers of different schools were not transferable. Every school was a separate unit and for the purpose of seniority and promotion, teaching experience and qualification etc. of the teachers of the same school are to be taken into consideration. According to the petitioner, the post of teachers of different schools were not transferable. Every school was a separate unit and for the purpose of seniority and promotion, teaching experience and qualification etc. of the teachers of the same school are to be taken into consideration. The petitioners grievance, therefore, is that he being the seniorrnost teacher in the school and having been appointed as acting Head Master by the managing committee of the school, should have been considered by the Board for appointment as the incharge Head Master. The decision of the Government contained in annexure 3 providing for taking into consideration the teaching experience gained in other schools for the purpose of promotion has been attacked as violativc of Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution. 3. Cause has been shown on behalf of respondents Nos.1 and 2, viz, the Chairman and the Assistant Secretary of the Bihar Secondary Education board as also on behalf of respondent No.5, Shyam Chandra Jha. It has been stated in the counter-affidavit of respondents Nos. I and 2 that although respondent, No.5 joined this school on 9th July, 1970, he had worked as assistant teacher in Munshilal Mandal high School from 25th January, 1965 to 8th July, 1970. It has been further stated that the managing committee of the school, after the promulgation of the Ordinance 112 of 1974, which came into force on 25th May, 1975, had been divested of the power of making appointmsnt of any teacher in the school. As such, the resolution of the managing committee dated 11th December, 1977 did not create any right in the petitioner. When the matter of appointment of the Incharge Head master of the school was being considered by respondent No.1, the representatiotn of the petitioner was also before him and respondent No.1 after careful consideration of the entire materials found respondent No.5 senior to the petitioner and made a stop-gap arrangement with respondent No, 5 as the Incharge Head Master of the school till a permanent Head Master was appointed. As regards the Circular contained in Annexure 8 to the writ application, it has been stated that the same has been issued under section 63 of the Bihar Secondary Education Board Act, 1976 , and is neither discriminatory nor vioiative of any of the provisions of the Constitution. As regards the Circular contained in Annexure 8 to the writ application, it has been stated that the same has been issued under section 63 of the Bihar Secondary Education Board Act, 1976 , and is neither discriminatory nor vioiative of any of the provisions of the Constitution. Respondent No.5, in his counter-affidavit, has contended that since after 6th April, 1978 he has been working as the Incharge Head Master of the school. His case, inter alia, is that he is senior to the petitioner and is, therefore, entitled to be appointed as the Incharge Head Master. 4. Shri J. N. P. Varma, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner, submitted the following points for consideration : (a) The appointment of the petitioner as acting Head Master having been made by the managing committee, the Board or any other authority could not interfere with it. The order contained in annexure 7, therefore, is illegal and without jurisdiction. (b) The Government order contained in Annexure 8 is ultra vires the constitution of India and is not authorised by the Bihar Secondary Education board Act, 1976. Before dealing with these questions, I would like to dispose of the objection raised by Shri Tara Kant Jha, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the Board. Shri Jha submitted that the writ application is not maintainable inasmuch as the petitioner has no right to be appointed as Incharge head Master, which is only a stop-gap arrangement. The Bihar Secondary education Board Act, 1976 (hereinafter referred to as the Act) provides for the appointment of head masters, teachers and other non-teaching staff. 5. One of the criteria for promotion to the post of Head Master appears to be seniority. In paragraph eight of the counter-affidavit filed by respondents nos.1 and 2, it has been stated that respondent No.5 was found to be senior to the petitioner. If, therefore, seniority of the petitioner vis-a-vis respondent No.5 has been determined by the Board, the petitioner has clearly a cause of action and can surely maintain his application, because his right, to be promoted as the Head Master of a school may be affected by such determination. The objection of Shri Jha, therefore, must be overruled. 6. Before considering the points raised by Shri J. N. P. Varma, it may be relevant to notice some of the provisions of the Act. The objection of Shri Jha, therefore, must be overruled. 6. Before considering the points raised by Shri J. N. P. Varma, it may be relevant to notice some of the provisions of the Act. The Bihar Secondary board Ordinance appears to have been first promulgated on 20th May, 1974. After successive Ordinances, the present Act came into force on 3lst December, 1976. The object of this Act is to improve and regularise the service conditions of the teachers in non-government high schools in Bihar. Section 3 of the Act provides for the constitution of a Board Sec.16 enumerates the powers of the Board. It, inter alia, provides that the Board will frame the service conditions of the teachers and non-teaching staff of all the high schools run by the Central Government. It has been authorised to regularise the teaching and service conditions of the teachers and non-teaching staff of the recognised high schools. Sec.18 enumerates the powers of the chairman of the Board. The Chairman is authorised to take such action or actions as he may think necessary in anticipation of the Boards approval, but he will have to obtain the approval of the Board for taking such action or actions at. its next meeting. The Chairman of the Board may issue necessary directions to the District Education Officer, the Sub-divisional Education officer etc, for official performance of the duties of the Board and its proper functioning. Chapter VI relates to provisions of the service conditions of the head masters, teachers and other non teaching staff of the high schools. Under section 39, the Board shall prescribe the service conditions of the head masters, teacher, and non-teaching staff of the high schools other than those run by the Centre. The service of the head masters, teachers and non-teaching staff of such high schools will come under the Board with effect from the date the Act comes into force. Sec.40 provides that appointment of head masters, teachers and non-teaching staff (except fourth-grade employees)shall be made in accordance with the provisions of the Act, and not otherwise. Sec.41 provides for the setting up of an Education Service Commission which will send recommendations to the Board for appointment of head masters and teachers and their promotion in high schools (except the Central high Schools ). Sec.41 provides for the setting up of an Education Service Commission which will send recommendations to the Board for appointment of head masters and teachers and their promotion in high schools (except the Central high Schools ). Sec.42 provides that every year the Board shall determine the number of vacancies for the post of head masters and teachers and request the Commission to send its recommendations for appointment to such posts. Sec.43 provides for the preparation of a list of suitable candidates in order of preference. According to Sec.44 whenever a vacancy in the post of head master or teacher in a high school (except Central High School)shall occur, the managing committee of the school shall inform the Board about it and make a request for appointment. The Board thereafter shall issue necessary directions to the District Education Officer and other authorities concerned to fill up the vacancy in accordance with sub-sections (3) and (4) of Sec.44 of the Act. For a period of six months from the date of coming into force of the Act, the managing committees were authorised under section 44 (5) of the Act to make ad hoc appointments with the approval of the Sub-divisional Education Officer Chapter VII provides for the managing committees of the schools. Sec.54 says that there shall be a managing committee for every high school consisting of certain members as mentioned therein. It will derive its powers under the rules framed under the Act as also from the directions issued by the Board or the Government from time to time Sec.56, which provides for the powers of the managing committee, does not authorise it to make any appointment of the head master or teacher of the school or even to make any recommendation in that behalf. Under section 63, the State Government can issue any direction to the Board which the Government thinks necessary. Sec.64 authorises the Board to frame rules for the purpose of carrying out the provisions of the Act, but the rules shall not come into force unless approved by the State Government. 7. From the different provisions of the Act mentioned above, it will be clear that the managing committee of a school has no power to make any appointment to the post of head master or teacher or even to make recommendation in that behalf. 7. From the different provisions of the Act mentioned above, it will be clear that the managing committee of a school has no power to make any appointment to the post of head master or teacher or even to make recommendation in that behalf. It is further clear that the appointment or promotion to the post of head master or teacher in the school shall be made by the Board in accordance with the provisions of the Act and the rules framed thereunder in that behalf. It is also clear that there is no post of incharge head Master as such. It was further stated at the Bar that the rules concerning the service conditions of the head masters or teachers of the school have not yet been framed by the Board. Shri Varma, therefore, contended that until the rules are framed, the Board is not authorised to make appointment to the post of head masters or teachers either directly or by promotion. He, however, submitted that since there may not be a vacum, the power still rests in the managing committee under the Bihar High Schools Service condition Rules, 1972 framed under the Bihar High School (Control and regulation of Administration) Act, 1960. The 1972 Rules provide that the appointment to the post of teachers and other staff of a school shall be made by the managing committee. According to Shri Varma, the 1972 Rules are saved under section 67 (2) (j) of the Act which reads as under : Shri Varma is not right in his submission. Under the Bihar High School (Control and Regulation of Administration) Act, i960, the Bihar Secondary education Board was established. With effect from the date on which a board is established under section 3 of the Act, the Bihar High School (Control and Regulation of Administration) Act, 1960, is repealed and the board shall stand dissolved. Sub-section (2) of Sec.67 is a saving clause. It saves the actions of the dissolved Board and vests the properties of the dissolved Board in the Board established under the Act. Sec.67 (2) (j)only provides that the employees of the dissolved Board whose services have been taken over by the new Board will have-any of the three options enumerated in sub-clauses (i), (ii) and (iii) of clause (j ). Sec.67 (2) (j)only provides that the employees of the dissolved Board whose services have been taken over by the new Board will have-any of the three options enumerated in sub-clauses (i), (ii) and (iii) of clause (j ). It is obvious that section 67 (2) ( j) relates to the officers of the dissolved Board whose services have been taken over by the new Board. Shri Varma is, therefore, not right in saying that the 1972 Rules are saved by Sec.67 (2) (j) (iii) of the Act. Sub-clause (iii)cannot be read in isolation. It only provides for one of the three options given to the officer of the dissolved Board under clause (j) of section 67 (2) of the Act. But the question still remains whether in absence of the rules framed by the Board under section 64, any appointmenr or promotion to the post of head-master or teacher can be made by the Board. As stated above, Sec.40 provides that the appointment of head master teacher and other non-teaching staff (except fourth-grade employee) shall be made in accordance with the provisions of the Act and not otherwise. I have enumerated above the various provisions of the Act in accordance with an appointment or promotion is to be made. Such a situation, it appears, was contemplated and a provision was made under section 63 of the Act empowering that State Government to issue such direction to the Board as the state Government thought necessary. The direction contained in Annexure 8 by the State Government appears to have been issued in this background. It has been stated in Annexure 8 that after considering all the aspects relating to the appointment and promotion of the head masters and assistant head masters, the Government in supersession of their Order No.2007, dated 2lst may, 1976 and No.4691, dated 10th November, 1976 had taken the following decisions. As regards the appointment to the post of head master, it was decided that until the creation of the district cadre, promotion will be made on the basis of merit cum seniority taking every school as a unit. It further provides that where the post of head master was vacant, the Secondary education Board can make arrangement for appointment of an Incharge Head master for the time being. It further provides that where the post of head master was vacant, the Secondary education Board can make arrangement for appointment of an Incharge Head master for the time being. Such arrangement shall continue until a permanent head master was appointed after the creation of the district cadre or for one year, whichever was earlier. It also provides the basis for determination of senitority etc. In my opinion, such a direction could be legally issued by the government under section 63 of the Act. This is only an interim arrangement pending, framing of the rules by the Board. As to how seniority will be determined for appointment to the post of head master "or assistant head master, sufficient guide-lines have been given and I am unable to find that any of the provisions contained in Annexure 8 is discriminatory or violative of the right guaranteed under the Consitution. 8. So far as the present case is concerned, no appointment has yet been made to the post of head master of the school in question. By Annexure 7, only a stop-gap arrangement has been made by the Board by permitting respondent No.5 to act as the Incharge Head Master. Such an arrangement cannot continue for more than one year according to Annexure 8. The board, in my opinion, was competent to make such an arrangement. I do not find any illegality in the order contained in Annexure 7. 9. While parting with this judgment, I would like to observe that although the Act is now more than two years old, the rules have not been framed as yet. It was stated at the Bar that the rules were framed by the board long time back and were sent to the State Government for approval where they are adorning the stuffed in almirah of the Secretariat awaiting their discovery. I have had occasions to notice such things in relation to other Acts also. Needless to say, it does not add a feather to the cap rather creates complications and breeds lisigation. It appears that Government, on their executive side, are more anxious to concentrate all the powers in the hands of the executives and want to administer law by executive actions more than in any other way. This is highly reprehensible. It is high-time that proper rules are framed for administering the provisions of the Act, viz. It appears that Government, on their executive side, are more anxious to concentrate all the powers in the hands of the executives and want to administer law by executive actions more than in any other way. This is highly reprehensible. It is high-time that proper rules are framed for administering the provisions of the Act, viz. , the bihar Secondary Education Board Act, 1976. 10. Having considered the facts and circumstances of this case, I do not find any merit in this application This application, therefore, fails and is dismissed. The question regarding seniority of the petitioner vis-a-vis respondent No.5 shall remain open and should be considred afresh in accordance with law at the time of making permanent appointment to the post of head master. There will be no order as to costs.