Judgment :- The petitioners are stated to be Head Clerks in the Kerala Panchayat Service. All of them are said to have not less than 10 years service and are also fully qualified for promotion to the next higher post. Their services are now governed by the Kerala Panchayat Common Service Rules, 1977 (for short C. S. rules) made by the Government of Kerala in exercise of the power conferred by sub-section (2) of S.39 and sub-section (1) of S.129 of the Kerala Panchayat Act. Rule 3 of the C. S. Rules provided that with effect on and from the first day of April 1977 (on which date the C. S. Rules cawe into force) the regular full time employees of the Panchayats other than the Executive Officer and those paid from contingencies shall be constituted into a common service for each District; and on the constitution of such common service, the District Panchayat Officer shall prepare a combined gradation list of persons holding each category of posts in the Panchayats of the District. The staff pattern in Panchayats was fixed by G. 6. (MS) 270/G1/DD, dated 25-9-1967; suffice to note that it did not provide for the Manager's post in the Panchayat Service. The post of Manager in Special Grade Panchayats was sanctioned by the Government of Kerala as per G.O. (MS) No. 83/77/L. A. & S. W. D. dated 16-3-1977, a true copy of which is Ext. P-1; and that was even before the coming into force of the C. S. Rules on 1-4-1977. Ext. P-1 provided inter alia that the appointment to the post of Managers in Special Grade Panchayats would be governed by the Special Rules to be framed in that behalf; and the posts of Managers in Special Grade Panchayats, pending the framing of Special Rules, would be filled up by promotion of the Head Clerks of the Panchayats in the District according to the common seniority. The 2nd respondent the Director of Panchayats, issued orders in his No. E3-23665/83/K. Dis dated 1-6-1983, directing all the District Panchayat Officers to fill up the post of Managers in Special Grade Panchayats by promoting the seniormost qualified Head Clerks in the combined gradation list as published in G. O. (MS) No. 131/80/L. A. & S. W. D. dated 11-6-1980. The 2nd respondent the Director of Panchayats, issued orders in his No. E3-23665/83/K. Dis dated 1-6-1983, directing all the District Panchayat Officers to fill up the post of Managers in Special Grade Panchayats by promoting the seniormost qualified Head Clerks in the combined gradation list as published in G. O. (MS) No. 131/80/L. A. & S. W. D. dated 11-6-1980. Feeling aggrieved by the delay in the implementation of this direction given by the 2nd respondent Director, the petitioners on 20-6-1983 made a representation to the Minister for Local Administration who directed the 2nd 'respondent to implement his decision to fill up the post of Managers in the Special Grade Panchayats by promoting the seniormost among the qualified Head Clerks in the combined gradation list published on 11-6-1980. Thereafter, however, on a petition seen to have been submitted by 4th respondent Smt. K. Jagadamma, Head Clerk, Kulasekharapuram Panchayat, Quilon District, the Government issued the communication No. 33651/H1/83, Local Administration & Social Welfare (H) Department dated 24-6-1983, a true copy of which is Ext. P-2, informing the 2nd respondent, Director of Panchayats, as follows: "As long as the qualification for appointment of the post of Manager in Panchayats have not been fixed, the Head Clerks who have been exempted will also be eligible for provisional promotion to that post till the expiry of the period of exemption " It is aggrieved by Ext. P2 communication that this writ petition has been filed by the petitioners. 2. No doubt, the petitioners have a case that extraneous considerations weighed with the Government, to issue a communication in the nature of Ext. P2 contrary to the earlier decision directing the 2nd respondent, the Director of Panchayats, to confine the appointment to fill up the vacancies of Managers in the Special Grade Panchayats to those who were fully qualified to hold the post of Head Clerks. No material to establish this allegation having been placed before the Court, I do not think that this contention deserves any serious consideration. 3. There appears to be little justification to put forward a grievance that promotions as ordered by the 2nd respondent Director in Ext. PI should be restricted to those who actually possessed the obligatory test qualifications for the post of Head Clerks. 3. There appears to be little justification to put forward a grievance that promotions as ordered by the 2nd respondent Director in Ext. PI should be restricted to those who actually possessed the obligatory test qualifications for the post of Head Clerks. The 2nd respondent, in terms, could not be understood to have meant the exclusion of those who did not acquire the test qualifications prescribed for the Head Clerks, when, in paragraph 3 of Ext.PI order, he stated: "Pending framing of these rules the posts of Managers will be filled up by promotion of the Head Clerks of the Panchayats in the District according to common seniority." The direction, rather the clarification, in Ext. P-2, by the Government is only to the effect that the Head Clerks who had been exempted from test qualifications also would be eligible for provisional promotions to the post of Managers till the expiry of the period of exemption. The persons qualified to be appointed as Head Clerks would include those who had been exempted from acquiring the qualifications; and once that exemption is granted in accordance with the provisions in the service rules in that behalf, there is no scope for making a further classification into those who became eligible to hold the post by passing the prescribed tests on the one hand, and those who became eligible to hold the post by reason of exemption from test 'qualifications granted to them on the other, in relation to the consideration for promotion. A decision of the Full Bench of this Court in Parameswaran v. State of Kerala (1972 KLT. 849) supports this view. In that case it was held that a person appointed to the post of a Lower Division Clerk on getting exemption from possessing the minimum general educational qualifications would be entitled to be promoted to the post of Upper Division Clerk in the absence of rule regarding the minimum educational qualifications for promotion. 4. After all, from Exts. In that case it was held that a person appointed to the post of a Lower Division Clerk on getting exemption from possessing the minimum general educational qualifications would be entitled to be promoted to the post of Upper Division Clerk in the absence of rule regarding the minimum educational qualifications for promotion. 4. After all, from Exts. P-1 and P-2 it is abundantly clear that it was only as an ad hoc measure or a provisional arrangement, pending the framing of the Special Rules in that behalf, the Head Clerks included in the combined gradation list as published in G. O. (MS) No. 131/80/L. A. & S. W. D. dated 11-6-1980 were ordered to be promoted on the basis of seniority to the post of Managers of the Special Grade Panchayats. Their continuation in that post necessarily would depend upon the special qualifications, if any, that might be prescribed by the Special Rules which are yet to be framed. This appears to be the view expressed by M. P. Menon, J. also in O. P. No. 6870 of 1981 decided on 25-7-1983. In these circumstances no interference with Ext. P2 is called for, nor is there any scope for the issue of a writ of mandamus to order promotion of the petitioners to the post of Managers of Special Grade Panchayats ignoring the directions or clarifications contained in Ext. P2. The result, therefore, is that the writ petition fails and is hereby dismissed, however, in the circumstances of the case, without any order as to costs. Issue carbon copy of this judgment to the Government Pleader free of charge and to the counsel for the petitioners and to the counsel for the 4th respondent on usual terms, if applied for in that behalf.