Saikia, C. J. (Actg.). - As all these 8 Civil Rules involve similar facts and same questions of law, they are heard and disposed of analogously. 2. The petitioners are Block Development Officers in their respective blocks. They impugn Notification dated 29.10.86, Annexure 'C' to the petition, whereby the services of as many as 47 officers having been placed at the disposal of the Depart­ment of Panchayat and Rural Development (C) by the Person­nel (A) Department vide their Notification No. AA/278/6/55 dated 22.9.86 they are appointed as Senior Block Development Offi­cers temporarily and until further orders in the scale of pay prescribed for A.C.S.-I (Junior Grade) and posted to the Blocks indicated against each with effect from the dates of their taking over charge, and the subsequent W.T message dated 5.11.86, Annexure C-1 to the petition, from the Secretary, Panchayat and Rural Development Department, Assam to all Deputy Commissioners stating that Government has decided that Senior Block Development Officers will be in overall charge of the blocks wherever they are posted and that he will be responsible for implementation of Special Rural Development Programmes, namely, IRDP, ILEGP. NREP, TRYSEM Biogas and such other works as may be entrusted to him from time to time : further sta­ting that all the staff in the block including the Block Deve­lopment Officer will work under the Senior Block Development Officer and the Senior Block Development Officers will be con­trolled by the Deputy Commissioners/Sub-Divisional Officers. 3. The petitioners' main contentions are : (1) That the appoin­tments of the respondents as Senior Block Development Officers are not warranted by any law and as such are void and that even if the posts of Senior Block Development Officers have been sanctioned by the relevant authorities, the appointments themselves, are premature, inasmuch as essential formalities have not been completed in that the expression 'Senior Block Development Officer' has not been defined; his status vis-a-vis the Block Development has not been stated; his powers have not been prescribed; the source and mode of recruitment and quali­fications of the Senior Block Development Officers have not been laid down in any law; and apparently their appointments seek to violate the Assam Service (Class-I) Rules, 1960 when the Central Government approved new appointments for the post. (2) Secondly, that the creation of the posts of the Senior Block Development Officers involves a question of Service law of great public importance and needs examination and final adju­dication by this Court, particularly the question whether the Government can appoint public functionaries without first defi­ning their spheres of functions, jurisdiction, powers and rights vis-a-vis similar public functionaries already in existence and functioning. In other words, the petitioners' contention is that the functions of the Block Development Officers having been earlier performed by them, the creation and filling up of the posts of Senior Block Development Officers will automatically effect their sphere of action and therefore their status and respon­sibilities which has not been envisaged under the Assam Panchayati Raj Act, 1972. 4. The petitions are being resisted by the Government of Assam filing an affidavit-in-opposition stating, inter-alia that the Block Development Officers in the State of Assam worked under the Mahakuma Parishad and are basically Panchayati Raj Functionaries. However, in the years gone by, many other Rural Development Programmes had been tagged to the work load of the Block Development Officers which are outside the per-view of the Mahakuma Parishad and that those additional programmes sponsored by the Central Government were not inclu­ded in the normal work load of the Block Development Officers while they were working under the administrative control of the Mafeakima Parishad. On assesment of the performances in relation to rural development the Government of India in the Ministry of Rural Development had for a number of years been considering the effective implementation of Special Rural Deve­lopment Programme which did not come within the purview of the Mahakuma Parishad and in this context the Central Government had been considering the question of appointment of Special Officers for that purpose and had mooted the idea to the respective State Governments. The Government of Assam in the Rural Development Department by its letter No. JS/RD/8/83-84/19 dated 27th July 1984 addressed to the Secretary, Ministry of Rural Development, New Delhi proposed the appo­intment of Senior Block Development Officers. In that letter it was specifically brought to the notice of the Government of India that the State Government had been experiencing consi­derable difficulties in the overall supervision and coordination of all these programmes and personnel at the level of the Block Development Officers. In that letter it was specifically brought to the notice of the Government of India that the State Government had been experiencing consi­derable difficulties in the overall supervision and coordination of all these programmes and personnel at the level of the Block Development Officers. It was further pointed out that the exis­ting Block Development Officers in the State of Assam worked directly under the Mahakuma Parishad, and were basically Pan-chayati Raj Functionaries. In that capacity they were preoccupied with large number of Panchayati Raj and Community Deve­lopment activities and were unable to devote any time for special Rural Development Programmes. By the letter No. 2011/2/84-IRD-111 dated 2nd April, 1985, the Government of India, Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Development Department addressed to the Secretary, Integrated Rural Development Programme of the res­pective State Governments communicated decision to create posts of Joint Block Development Officer or equivalent posts. How­ever, by a subsequent Memo. No. 20013/2/82-IRD-III dated 27th April 1985, the Government of India, Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Development Department addressed to Joint Secretary to the Government of Assam, Rural Development Department con­veyed its no objection to the creation of the posts of Senior Block Development Officers. Further by Memo No. 14012/2/85-IRD-III dated 3rd February, 1986 the Government of India int­imated to the Government of Assam the sanction of 134 posts of Senior Block Development Officers at the rate of one post in every Development Block. The Government of India further intimated that it would meet 50 per cent of the expenditure of those posts. The 47 Senior Block Development Officers appoin­ted vide Annexure "C" form part of these 134 posts. 5. We have carefully scrutinised the correspondence between the Central Government and the Government of Assam and enter­tain no doubt that these 134 posts of Senior Block Deve­lopment Officers have been created by the State Government and 50 per cent of tie money will be borne by the Central Govern­ment and the purpose of creation is effective implementation of the Centrally-sponsored Special Rural Development Programmes outside the purview of the Mahakuma Parishad. We have also noticed that till the creation and filling up of these posts, the functions in relation to these Special Rural Development Pro­grammes in different Blocks were performed by the Block Development Officers in addition to their own duties and that the pos­ting of the Senior Block Development Officers necssitated the transfer of those functions, that is in relation to the Special Rural Development Programmes, from the Block Development Officers to the Senior Block Development Officers. This was made clear in the Government of India's communication dated 3rd February, 1986 vide Annexure "D" to the counter filed by the Government conveying the approval of the Government of India for the creation of 134 posts of Senior Block Develop­ment Officers one post in every Development Block in the pay scale of Rs. 875 - 1850/- under the scheme of strengthening of block level administration as a special case on the folia»ving terms and conditions ; - i) the IRD Programme should be implemented through the block machinery ; li) the concerned DRDAs should have direct control over the block and BDOs. The DRDAs and the State depart­ments dealing with the iRD Programme should be in one line of hierarchy ; iii) additional staff which is being provided for, should primarily be deployed for the IRD programme and iv) the State Govt. should prepare to meet the 50% of the expenditure on these posts. From Annexures 'E' and 'G' to the writ petition there is no doubt that 134 posts of Senior Block Development Officers had been created and the 47 persons vide Annexure 'C' have been appointed. The first question is whether the creation of the posts of Senior Block Development Officers and filling up those posts and entrusting one Block Development Officer or posting one Senior Block Development Officer to each Development Block ipso facto affect the services of the Block Develop­ment Officers ? From the communication and the counter affi­davit there is no doubt that in so far as the functions of the Block Development Officers under the Mahkuma Parishad are concerned, they remained intact and in no way affected by posting of the Senior Block Development Officers. From the communication and the counter affi­davit there is no doubt that in so far as the functions of the Block Development Officers under the Mahkuma Parishad are concerned, they remained intact and in no way affected by posting of the Senior Block Development Officers. In so far as the responsibilities entrusted to the Senior Block Develop­ment Officers in respect of Special Rural Development Progra­mmes are concerned, which were hitherto entrusted to the Block Development Officers, there necessarily arises the need for trans­fer of those responsibilities from the Block Development Officers to the Senior Block Development Officers. Mr. Das has clearly stated that the Block Development Officers would not be affected in so far as their pay and allowances and other service con­ditions are concerned. In a developing Rural Department for the purpose of administrative efficiency if different strata or grades of posts of officers are created, filled up and higher administrative responsibilities entrusted to them, so long the Block Development Officers' original functions under the Mah­kuma Parishads are not affected, the Block Development Officers should not have any occasion to grudge. In so far as the functions they were hitherto performing in connection with the Special Rural Envelopment Programmes are concerned, if those are transferred to the Senior Block Development Officers then also there should be no justification for their feeling to have been deprived because these were not their original functions and were entrusted to them in addition to their normal duties. In the above view of the matter, the Block Development Officers cannot be said to have been affected in their service. 6. The next question is that they have been placed under the Senior Block Development Officers. In so far as the admi­nistrative expediency is concerned, the system, design or speci­fication of the administrative machinery has to be left to the administrative authorities. No hard and fast rule can be laid down in this regard, and for that matter, there would be no justification on the part of the Court to interfere in this respect so long there is no violation of any law or prescribed procedure to the detriment of the employees affected. Mr. Das fairily states that the Block Development Officers have not been othe­rwise affected in their salary and other service conditions. 7. The next submission is that without framing of Rules defining the duties and responsibilities etc. Mr. Das fairily states that the Block Development Officers have not been othe­rwise affected in their salary and other service conditions. 7. The next submission is that without framing of Rules defining the duties and responsibilities etc. the Government could not have created the posts and filled them up. This submission is not tenable inasmuch as the Government in exer­cise of its power need not necessarily wait till the Rules are framed. Even without the Rules the Government's Executive power does not suffer from any limitation. That which the Government could do by framing Rules it could also do, within the limits of law, without these Rules. In the instant case, the submission that the Government ought to have waited till the Rules were framed prescribing the service condition has to be rejected. The creation of the posts and posting of the Senior Block Development Officers, therefore, cannot be questioned on the ground of absence of Rules. 8. The next submission is that the Senior Block Develop­ment Officers who belong to A. C. S. Class-I could be posted as Senior Block Development Officers only on deputation and not otherwise and that the Notification Annexure 'C' does not make this position clear. On careful perusal of the Annexure we find that it begins with the expression "on their services having been placed at the disposal of this Department by the Personnal (A) Department" which leaves no doubt that Perso­nnel (A) Department have placed their services at the disposal of the Rural Development Department. The Assam Civil Ser­vices (Class-I) Rules, 1960 are, therefore, not directly attracted. The submission that as many as 47 officers could not have been deputed under those Rules cannot also be accepted in the abs­ence of the up-to-date data relating to the strength of that cadre. While taking the above view we follow what their Lordships of the Supreme Court held in N. Ramanatha Filial vs. The State of Kerala and another, AIR 1973 SC 2641 at para 14 which reads: "The first question which falls for determination is whether the Government has a right to abolish a post in the service. The power to create or abolish a post is not related to the doctrine of pleasure. It is a matter of governmental policy. Every sovereign Government has this power in the int­erest and necessity or internal administration. The power to create or abolish a post is not related to the doctrine of pleasure. It is a matter of governmental policy. Every sovereign Government has this power in the int­erest and necessity or internal administration. The crea­tion or abolition of post is dictated by policy decision, exigencies of circumstances and administrative necessity. The creation, the continuance and the abolition of post are all decided by the Government in the interest of admi­nistration and general public." It is common knowledge that India lives in the villages. The development of rural India is of utmost importance. How that is best done has been left to the Government and if the State Government in consultation with the Central Government has considered it administratively necessary for proper imple­mentation of the Special Rural Development Programmes to cre­ate 134 posts of Senior Block Development Officers and post one to each of the Blocks with the responsibility of implemen­ting the Special Rural Development Programmes in that block, that must be held to be a purely administrative decision taken in exercise of the sovereign function of the State, and unless any statutory or Constitutional violation is pointed out its vali­dity cannot be doubted by this Court. This is particularly so when admittedly the Block Development Officers' original functions under the purview of the Mahkuma Parishad have not been affected at all and they have not suffered any economic loss thereby. 9. In the result, these petitions are found to be without merit and they are rejected. The interim orders in all the Civil Rules stand vacated. We make no order as to costs.