ORDER 1. This order shall dispose of W.P. No. 3942/98 (Mohammad Yusuf v. State of M.P. and another), writ petition No. 3543/98 (Ramratan Patel v. The State of M.P. and others), W.P. 3545/98 (Devaki Nandan Soni and others v. State of M.P. and others, W.P. 3166/98 (Rajkumar Sahu v. The Deputy Director of Education, Jabalpur and others), W.P. No. 3559/98 (Virendra Kumar Dwivedi v. The State of M.P. and others), W.P. No. 3812/98 (P.K. Tiwari v. State of M.P. and others), W.P. No. 3832/98 (Madan Gopal Khare v. State of M.P. and others), W.P. 3833/98 (Param Lal Gupta v. The State of M.P. and others), W.P. No. 3842/98 (Sangeeta Namdev and another v. State or M.P. and others), W.P. 3847/98 (Triveni Bai Rai v. State of M.P. and others), W.P. 3853/98 (Poonam Mishra v. State of M.P. and others), W.P. No. 3854/98 (Ku. Rajni Garg and Ors. v. The Janpad Panchayat and others), W.P. No. 3855/98 (Ku. Sangeeta Sharma v. State of M.P. and others), W.P. No. 3867/98 (Baidyaraj Dubey v. State of M.P. and others), W.P. 3922/98 (Mohini Tiwari v. Municipal Corporation. Jabalpur), W.P. 3949/98 (Arvind Kumar Khare v. State of M.P. and others), W.P. No. 3950/98 (Kushal Singh Chauhan v. The State of M.P. and others), W.P. 3876/98 (Anirudh Kumar Sharma v. State of M.P. and others), W.P. 3877/98 (Ku. Kalpana Rajpur v. State of M.P. and others), W.P. 3878/98 (Ku. Nandini Pandey v. State of M.P. and others), W.P. 3879/98 (Ku. Prabha Rajput v. State of M.P. and others), W.P. 3880/98 (Shyam Narayan Dwivedi and another v. State of M.P. and others), W.P. 3893/98 (Omprakash Tiwari and others v. State of M.P. and others), W.P. 3900/98 (Shivkumar and another v. The State of M.P. and others), W.P. No. 3907/98 (Smt. Urmial Sahu v. The State of M.P. and others), W.P. 3909/98 (Tamsingh Thakur v. State of M.P. and others), W.P. No. 3913/98 (Tarapad v. State of M.P. and others) and W.P. No. 3932/98 (Pannalal Tiwari v. State of M.P. and others). 2. By Notification No. F-20-95-XXII-P-2, dated 1st January, 1998, in exercise of the powers conferred by sub-Section (2) of Section 70 read with sub Section (1) of Section 95 of M.P. Panchayat Raj Adhiniyam, 1993 (No.1 of 1994), the State Government made rules called as M.P. Panchayat Shiksha Karrnis (Recruitment and Conditions of Service) Rules, 1997. 2. By Notification No. F-20-95-XXII-P-2, dated 1st January, 1998, in exercise of the powers conferred by sub-Section (2) of Section 70 read with sub Section (1) of Section 95 of M.P. Panchayat Raj Adhiniyam, 1993 (No.1 of 1994), the State Government made rules called as M.P. Panchayat Shiksha Karrnis (Recruitment and Conditions of Service) Rules, 1997. According to rule 1, the said Rules would come into force with effect from the date of their final publication in M.P. Gazette. Undisputedly the rules have already been published and have come into force. By Notification No. F-20-95-XXII-P-2, dated 13th April, 98 in exercise of the same powers, the State Government made certain amendments in M.P. Panchayat Shiksha Karmis (Recruitment and Conditions of Service) Rules, 1997 (hereinafter referred to as 'Panchayat Appointment Rules'). By the amendment sub-clause (b) of clause (i) of sub-rule (9) of Rule 5 was amended and Schedule II was also amended. 3. By Notification No. F-4-105-98-XVIII-1, dated 28th March. 98 in exercise of the powers conferred by Section 433 read with Section 58 of M.P. Municipal Corporation Act, 1956 (No. 23 of 1956) (hereinafter referred to as 'Corporation Act') and Section 355 read with Section 95 of the M.P. Municipalities Act 1961 (No. 37 of 1961) (hereinafter referred to as 'Municipalities Act), the State Government made rules relating to recruitment and conditions of service titled as M.P. Municipality Shiksha Karmi (Recruitment and Conditions of Service) Rules. 1998 (hereinafter referred to as 'Municipality Appointment Rules). By a further Notification No. F-4-105-98-XVIII-1, dated 17th April 98 in exercise of the same powers, the Municipal, Panchayat Appointment Rules were amended. In sub-clause (b) of clause (i) of sub-rule (9) of Rule 5, an amendment was incorporated and similarly part of the Schedule II appended to the Rules was also amended. The Rules were made by the State Government to control the recruitment and conditions of service of Panchayat Shiksha Karmis and the Municipal Shiksha Karmis. Without going into detailed reference of the context in which the rules were made, suffice it to say that in Panchayats and Municipalities/Municipal Corporation, Shiksha Karmis were being appointed for imparting education. Their appointments were for a fixed term and on a fixed pay. Such persons worked as Shiksha Karmis for very long years, but the State Government. Without going into detailed reference of the context in which the rules were made, suffice it to say that in Panchayats and Municipalities/Municipal Corporation, Shiksha Karmis were being appointed for imparting education. Their appointments were for a fixed term and on a fixed pay. Such persons worked as Shiksha Karmis for very long years, but the State Government. Panchayats and the corporate authorities did not give them regular appointments nor did give them the regular pay scale nor regularized their services, therefore, number of the petitions were filed in the High Court. The High Court disposed of the petitions with certain directions. The State Government being aggrieved by the Judgment of the High Court took up the matter to the Supreme Court, but withdrew the Special Leave Petition interalia pleading that proper rules would be framed and the appointments shall be made in accordance with the Rules. It was also submitted before the Supreme Court that due weightage would be given to the Shikshakarmis who had worked for one or more session. 4. In Panchayat Appointment Rules, 'Adhiniyam' means the Panchayat Raj Adhiniyam, 1993, 'Appointing Authority' in respect of Shikshakarmis means the authority mentioned in column 5 of Schedule I of the Rules, 'Panchayat' means Zila Panchayat or Janpad Panchayat, as the case may he constituted under the Adhiniyam, 'Shikshakarmi' means the person appointed by Zila Panchayat or Janpad Panchayat and 'Standing Committee constituted under the Act. 5. According to the Municipality Appointment Rules. 'Act' means the M.P. Municipal Corporation Act, 1956 and the M.P. Municipalities Act, 1961. 'Appointing Authority' means the appointing authority as specified under Section 58 of M.P. Municipal Corporation Act, 1956 in case of Municipal Corporation and under Section 94 of the M.P. Municipalities Act, 1961 in case of Municipal Council and Nagar Panchayat, 'Municipality' means a Municipal Corporation of any Municipal Council or Nagar Panchayat constituted under the respective Acts, and 'Shikshakarmi' means the person appointed by the Municipal Corporation. Municipal Council or Nagar Panchayat, as the case may be, for teaching in the schools under their control. In the definitions clause that is Rule 2, the meaning assigned to the word 'Government'. 'State' and 'Schedule' are same in both the Rules. Rule 3 of the respective Rules provide, that the Rules shall apply to the Shiksha Karmis appointed by Janpad Panchayat or Zila Panchayat and by the Municipalities. 6. In the definitions clause that is Rule 2, the meaning assigned to the word 'Government'. 'State' and 'Schedule' are same in both the Rules. Rule 3 of the respective Rules provide, that the Rules shall apply to the Shiksha Karmis appointed by Janpad Panchayat or Zila Panchayat and by the Municipalities. 6. Both the Rules provide method of Selection and recruitment. According to Rules, recruitment to the cadre of Shikshakarmi, after the commencement or the Rules shall be made either by direct recruitment by selection or by promotion as specified in Schedule IV. The percentage of posts to be filed by direct recruitment and promotion are required to be specified in column 4 and 5 of Schedule III of the Rules governing distinct appointments. Conditions or eligibility for direct recruitment and promotion are required to be specified in Schedule II. Posts of direct recruitment of Shikshakarmis are required to be reserved for the candidates belonging to Scheduled Castes, Scheduled Tribes and other Backward Classes in accordance with the provisions or M.P. Lok Seva (Anusuchit Jatiyon, Anusuchit Jan Jatiyon Aur Anya Pichda Vargon Ke Liye Arakshana Adhiniyam. 1994). The posts are required to be reserved for candidates belonging to women, disabled persons, ex-servicemen and such other classes according to the Rules of the State Government. The posts are required to be advertised in atleast one Hindi daily newspaper having wide circulation in the area, notified to local Employment Exchange and are also to be exhibited on the notice board of the concerned authority. After scrutiny of the applications received, category wise merit list of the candidates belonging to the reserved classes and general category are to be prepared on the basis of the marks obtained in qualifying examination for the post. On basis of number of the vacancies in each category, three times the number or vacancies to be tilled in each category shall be called for interview. Candidates who have worked minimum for one session in the schools or the concerned Municipal Corporation. Municipality of Panchayat would be called for interview or test. The Selection Committee is required to be constituted in accordance with Schedule II. The selections ordinarily are required to be made during the summer vacations before the commencement of academic session. 7. Candidates who have worked minimum for one session in the schools or the concerned Municipal Corporation. Municipality of Panchayat would be called for interview or test. The Selection Committee is required to be constituted in accordance with Schedule II. The selections ordinarily are required to be made during the summer vacations before the commencement of academic session. 7. According to Rule 5(9), the Committee is required to assess the candidates called for interview and award marks in the manner given in sub-rule (9), 60% marks for marks obtained in the qualifying examination specified in Schedule II. It can be clearly understood at this place that 60% marks of the percentage obtained by the candidate in the qualifying examination are to be given to him irrespective of any other thing, to simplify it, if a person has obtained 60 marks out of 100 marks in his qualifying examination, then 60% of the 60 marks, that is 36 marks, is to be given to him straightway, in view of clause (a) of Rule 5(9)(i) 25% marks are to be given to the candidates for the teaching experience in the schools of concerning authority. The similar benefits is to be given for teaching experience of equivalent rural schools. The Rule provides that the decision of the Committee on validity and valuation of the certificate of teaching experience of rural school would be final. Balance 15% marks are reserved for oral test which may include the test for :-- (i) Communication skills in local dialect; (ii) Knowledge of local environment; (iii) General knowledge; (iv) Training ad Teaching Aptitude and (v) Any other test which the Selection Committee may deem fit. On other things remaining the same, preference is to be given to the candidates possessing B.Ed., B.T.I. or D.Ed. certificate Again all other things remaining the same in the final selection, those who have teaching experience of schools of concerned Municipality, concerned Municipal Corporation, concerned Janpad Panchayat or concerned Zila Panchayat, will be given preference. The select list is required to be made in accordance with the provisions of the Rules in order of merit and should include 10% names in waiting list, which shall be valid for six months. 8. The State Government has been given power to make compassionate appointments. The select list is required to be made in accordance with the provisions of the Rules in order of merit and should include 10% names in waiting list, which shall be valid for six months. 8. The State Government has been given power to make compassionate appointments. According to Rule 7, every person directly recruited to the post of Shikshakarmi shall be appointed on probation and on finding his work to be satisfactory, he may be appointed in the regular pay scale, but if the performance is not found satisfactory after the extended period his services shall be terminated. Appointment on promotion is to be made through Departmental Promotion Committee constituted in Schedule IV. The services of Shikshakarmi who is not in permanent service, shall be liable to termination at any time by one month's notice in writing or on payment of one month's pay and allowances given either by the Shikshakarmi to the Appointing Authority or by the Appointing Authority to the Shikshakarmi. If any person is aggrieved by any order passed under these Rules, may make an appeal as per provisions of the Adhiniyam. 9. After the amendment in the Panchayat Appointment Rules and Municipality Appointment Rules sub-clause (b) of clause (i) of sub-rule (9) of Rule 5, instead of covering the experience of 'equivalent rural schools' directs that the experience shall be counted if the person has worked with 100% State Government aided and recognized rural school for the purposes of Pancyayat' and 100% State Govt. aided and recognized school, situated in the urban area.' The age which was prescribed as 35, 32 and 30 years in Schedule II was refixed as 33, 33 and 33 years in relation to Shikshakarrni Grade I, II and III. 10. Constitutional validity of the amendment made in sub-clause (b) of clause (i) of sub-rule (9) of Rule (5) has been challenged before this Court in some of the petitions, but as the said question is not in dispute before me neither I am required to consider the constitutional validity of the Rules: nor I am required to dwell upon the said area. 11. Hundreds of the petitions have been filed in this Court challenging the appointments, the selection process, non-issuance of the notice for interviews, etc. 11. Hundreds of the petitions have been filed in this Court challenging the appointments, the selection process, non-issuance of the notice for interviews, etc. Allegations have also been made against the members of the Selection Committee which go to the extent of saying that the members have played foul and fraud with the appointment rules, they have appointed their relatives, kiths and kins; and have obliged other persons. The allegations go to the extent of saying that members of the selection committee after taking part in the selection process, have appointed themselves. The allegations are that 25% bonus marks required to be given to the candidates on basis of the past experience have not been given in accordance with law. It is also contended in number of the petitions that the MLA or MP took part as a Member in the selection committee or at places, they deputed their representatives to take part in the selection committee meeting. These are also the allegations that the advertisements were for particular posts with specific reservations, but either the post/subject has been changed or the reservation percentage has been changed to oblige people belonging to a particular caste. It is also alleged in number of the petitions that seats/posts available to the general category have been given to the reserved categories or vice-versa. The allegations virtually are that the selection process is not only polluted because of the illegality committed by the members of the Selection Committee, but the same is infested by illegalities, and the vires of the illegality has affected the selection list so badly that it is required to be terminated or removed absolutely. In number of the petitions, this Court had made interim orders and had issued notices to the otherside. This Court also directed the appointing authorities/selection committees to give 25% bonus marks or marks according to entitlement and has also directed by interim measure that the persons who arc not invited for interviews, be invited for interviews. In some of the matters, the Court has directed that the persons against whom specific allegations have been made should file their affidavits and the selection committee should produce the original records. In some of the matters, the Court has directed that the persons against whom specific allegations have been made should file their affidavits and the selection committee should produce the original records. In view of the complaint made in some of the petitions that very low marks has been given in the oral test to the complainant and higher marks have been given to the blessed few or the relatives, the Court has ordered that such records be also placed before this Court. 12. The above-referred petitions are listed today for consideration. 13. Shri S.N. Khare, learned counsel for respondent/State has raised a preliminary objection that if Rule 12 of the respective Rules provides for an appeal, then the aggrieved party must approach the appellate forum, and these petitions should not be entertained, or in any case be dismissed at the threshold. 14. The petitioners, in their turn, have submitted that the petitioners may not get justice from the appellate forum, the same is not effective, efficacious and speedy remedy, therefore, this Court must intervene. Shri D.S. Thakur, learned counsel submits that in his matters, the Collector is exercising suo-motu revisional powers without any authority of law, therefore, this Court must interfere. Placing reliance upon the Judgment of the Supreme Court in the matter of Bir Bajrang Kumar v. State of Bihar and others ( AIR 1987 SC 1345 ), it was submitted that if one petition has been admitted for hearing, then other petitions raising the similar question should not be dismissed because the same tends to a clear possibility of contradictory judgments being rendered by the High Court, placing reliance upon the judgments reported in AIR 1971 SC 33 , AIR 1992 Born. 179 and 1986 JLJ 722 = AIR 1986 MP 159 , it was submitted by Shri Thakur that the alternative remedy should not be construed as an absolute bar, if the facts clearly show an apparent breach rather an assassination of the rules. 179 and 1986 JLJ 722 = AIR 1986 MP 159 , it was submitted by Shri Thakur that the alternative remedy should not be construed as an absolute bar, if the facts clearly show an apparent breach rather an assassination of the rules. Placing his further reliance on the judgment of this Court in the matter of Chambal Ghati Shiksha Prasar Samiti v. State of M.P. and others (1996 RN 46 = 1995 MPLJ 969 ), it was submitted that if a petition is entertained and during the pendency of the petition the remedy for seeking alternative remedy expires, then the petition should be heard on merits and the parties should not be relegated to remedies under the statute. 15. Shri Shrivastava submits that the petitioners are in the waiting list, but contrary to the seniority in the waiting list, the others are being given chance of appointment marring upon the rights of the petitioners therefore, this Court must interfere. Shri Sharma submits that as the whole selection process is bad and as their representations are not being considered, this Court must interfere. Shri Prashant Singh, learned counsel for some of the petitioners submits that list of the persons found fit fur being invited to face the interview proceedings has already been made, but the petitioners who are otherwise qualified to be included, have not been included in the said list, this Court must interfere. His further submission is that the representations made by his petitioners have not been considered, therefore, this Court must interfere. Miss Tanu Tandon, learned counsel for some of the petitioners submits that some of the petitioners were entitled to the bonus marks as experience weightage, and as the said weightage marks are not being given to them, and they are not being invited for interview nor are being appointed, this Court must interfere. For some of the petitioners, it was submitted by her that the petitioners have already been selected, but the orders of appointment are not being issued and permission of the higher authorities/State Government is awaited and this non-action on part of the appointing authority is affecting the petitioners' rights, and is also contrary to the appointment rules which do not provide that the higher authorities permission be obtained, this Court must interfere. Shri Tiwari submits that his is a case of clear injustice, therefore, the Court must interfere. Shri Tiwari submits that his is a case of clear injustice, therefore, the Court must interfere. Shri Mishra, learned counsel for some of the petitioners submits that as there are no orders, they cannot prefer appeals. According to him, repeated representations were made, but the authorities are not deciding the representations and on the other hand are issuing appointment orders in favour of the relatives of the members of the selection committee, and in some of the cases the selection committee is issuing the orders in favour of the members of the selection committee. According to him, the ratio of 1:3 is not being maintained in preparing the list, therefore, this Court must interfere, Shri Sanjay Tamrakar, learned counsel submits that the language of the Rule 12 of the Appointment Rules does not oblige an aggrieved party to prefer an appeal because the words employed in Rule 12 are appeal against the order passed, under rules may be made. According to him, Section 91 of Panchayat Raj Adhiniyam provides that an appeal shall lie to such authority and in such manner as may be prescribed, therefore, there is a clear distinction in the language of Rule 12 of the Appointment Rules and Section 91. According to him, Section 91 obliges a person to file an appeal while Rule 12 of the Appointment Rules leaves it to the discretion of the aggrieved party to prefer or not to prefer an appeal. Shri A.K. Mishra, learned counsel for some of the petitioners submits that his petitioners were not called for interview, therefore, this Court should intervene. Shri P.R. Bhave, learned counsel for some of the petitioners submits that the selection list is not a final order, but simply provides that particular persons are fit to be appointed. According to him, the final orders are to be issued by the appointing authority and if the appointment orders have not been issued, there are no orders which can be challenged before the appellate forum. 16. Shri R.L. Gupta, learned counsel appearing for some of the petitioners submits that in view of the illegalities committed by the selection committee and the manner in which the members of selection committee have exercised their powers, and as the illegalities are writ large, are floating on the surface and have polluted the stream of appointment, this Court must intervene and set aside the illegal orders. Shri Sharad Verma, placing his reliance upon the judgment of this Court in the matter of Chambal Ghati (supra) submits that this Court should not direct tl1e petitioners to approach the appellate forum, but must intervene. Shri Mukhtar Ahmed, learned counsel appearing for some petitioners submits that as copy of the list has not been supplied to him, he is unable to prefer the appeal. He submits that the authority is duty bound to supply the copy of the selection list and non-supply, for no good reason, in fact offends his right of appeal. Smt. Archana Tiwari, learned counsel submits that her petitioner was entitled to 25% bonus marks as she has worked as a Director in non-formal education programme, but the selection committee is refusing to grant the said marks contrary to the directions of the State Govt., therefore, this Court must intervene. Shri R.N. Mehrotra, learned counsel submits that Rule 5(1)(9)(i)(a) has been misconstrued and misinterpreted, therefore, this Court must intervene and lay down the correct guidelines. Shri Rajesh Pandey, learned counsel submits that some of the petitioners have the teaching experience of non-formal education programme, therefore, in view of the circular of the State Government dated 18.6.98, each of the petitioner is entitled to the bonus marks of 25% and as the said marks have not been given, this Court must interfere. 17. Shri S.N. Khare, learned counsel for State submits that Rule 12 clearly makes a provision for an appeal. According to him, the said rule does nowhere say that an appeal shall lie against the final order. He submits that every order passed at' whatever stage can be challenged before the appellate forum. According to him, the Panchayat Appeal Rules, 1995 read with Section 91 of M.P. Panchayat Raj Adhiniyam and Rule 12 of the Municipality Appointment Rules clearly protect the rights of the petitioner incases of municipal appointments. He submits that at various stages, various orders have been made, and if the petitioners are aggrieved, they can challenge the said orders. According to him, the preparation of the list at all the stages amounts to an order and such orders can be challenged under Rule 12. He submits that the final selection list infact is a final order and issuance of the appointment order which infact is the appointment letter is not an order. According to him, the preparation of the list at all the stages amounts to an order and such orders can be challenged under Rule 12. He submits that the final selection list infact is a final order and issuance of the appointment order which infact is the appointment letter is not an order. According to him, the execution of the final order or issuance of the communication to the selected candidate is not an order. He submits that this Court must refuse to interfere in these matters as the alternative remedy is available to each of the petitioner. 18. I have heard the parties at length on the question of availability of the alternative remedy, its efficacy and effectiveness. 19. The allegations made in these petitions can be categorised as under:- (a) That the members of the Selection Committee have appointed their relatives, kiths and kins and in some of the matters have appointed the members of the Selection Committee themselves, who have otherwise taken part in the selection process; (b) That the bonus marks in accordance with Rule 5(1)(9)(i)(b) have not been given to the candidates according to their entitlement; (c) That competent persons have not been invited for interviews; (d) That contrary to the provisions of Schedule II, Member of Parliament or Member of Legislative Assembly or their representatives have taken part in the meeting of the Selection Committee, and have polluted the sanctity of the proceedings, and have infact exerted their pressure upon the members of the Selection Committee to secure appointments in favour of their candidates; (e) That advertisements were for particular posts in particular subjects and were with specific reservation, but either the posts have been changed, the subjects have been changed or the reservation percentage has been changed; and (f) That the selection process stands vitiated in general in view of the allegations made in each of the petition. 20. Before entering into the allegations made in the petitions, it would be necessary for this Court to consider the availability, efficacy, expediency and effectiveness of the alternative remedy provided under the different Acts. Rule 12 in either of the Appointment Rules provides that an appeal against the order passed under the Rules may be made as per provisions of the Adhiniyam and the Rules made thereunder. Rule 12 in either of the Appointment Rules provides that an appeal against the order passed under the Rules may be made as per provisions of the Adhiniyam and the Rules made thereunder. Section 91 of M.P. Panchayat Raj Adhiniyam provides that an appeal or revision against the orders or proceedings of a Panchayat and other authorities under the Act, shall lie to such authority and in such manner as may be prescribed. In exercise of the powers conferred by sub-Section (1) of Section 95 read with Section 91 of Panchayat Raj Adhiniyam, the State Government has made M.P. Panchayats (Appeal & Revision) Rules, 1995. Rule 3 provides that save where it has been otherwise provided in the Act or Rules or Byelaws made thereunder, an appeal shall lie to the Collector against the order of SDO, to the Commissioner against the order of the Collector, and to the State Government if the order is passed by the Commissioner or Director of Panchayats. It further provides that in case an order is passed by the Gram Panchayat, an appeal shall lie to the SDO, if it is passed by Janpad Panchayat to the Collector, and if the order is made by Zila Panchayat, then to the Commissioner. The limitation of the appeal is provided by Rule 4 which would be thirty days from the date of the order, but the appellate authority has been given power to admit an appeal after the expiry of thirty days, if it is satisfied that there was sufficient cause for not presenting it within the said period. Rule 5 provides for revisions. According to rule, the State Govt., the Commissioner, the Director of Panchayat, the Collector may on its/his own motion or on the application by any party, at any time for the purpose of satisfying itself/himself as to the legality or propriety of any order passed by or as to the regularity of the proceeding of, the authority sub-ordinate to it/him all for and examine the record of any case pending before or disposed of by, such authority and may pass such order in reference thereto as it/he may think fit. The restriction on the powers of the revisional authority arc that it/he shall not vary or reverse any order unless notice has been served on the parties interested and opportunity given to them for being heard. The restriction on the powers of the revisional authority arc that it/he shall not vary or reverse any order unless notice has been served on the parties interested and opportunity given to them for being heard. The limitation for filing the revision is sixty days which may be extended if the authority is satisfied that there was sufficient cause for not presenting it within that period. The law does not provide any limitation for exercise of suo-motu revisional powers, but by the law settled by this Court and the Apex Court, such powers are to be exercised within reasonable period. Rule 8 provides for grant of stay. According to Rule 9, the appellate or revisional authority has powers to make a further enquiry as it may deem necessary subject to the provisions of the Act and the Rules made thereunder, may confirm, vary or set aside the order or decision appealed against. 21. At this juncture, the objection relating to interpretation of Rule 12 of the Appointment Rules and Section 91 of the Panchayat Raj Adhiniyam can be disposed of. Section 91 provides that an appeal shall lie to such authority and in such manner as may be prescribed. The authority to whom and the manner in which the appeal is to be filed is prescribed under the Appeal & Revision Rules, 1995. If a person is desirous of filing an appeal or revision, then he has to file an appeal to the prescribed authority in the manner as prescribed under the Rules. The contention of the learned counsel that Rule 12 of the Appointment Rules simply provides that an appeal may be filed or made as per provisions of the relevant Adhiniyam and/or the rules made thereunder, would give a discretion to the aggrieved party, is mis-conceived. The law would not ask a person to file an appeal. It is his discretion to file or not to file an appeal. If he is desirous of filing an appeal, then the appeal must be filed to the authority and in the manner as may be prescribed. According to Rule 12, a person has been given a right to prefer an appeal which he may so prefer, but Section 91 read with the Appeal & Revision Rules shall govern the form and the manner in which the appeal is required to be filed. The argument made by learned counsel is rejected. According to Rule 12, a person has been given a right to prefer an appeal which he may so prefer, but Section 91 read with the Appeal & Revision Rules shall govern the form and the manner in which the appeal is required to be filed. The argument made by learned counsel is rejected. The word 'Order' with its grammatical variation would cover in its sweep; a mandate, a command, a request, a species of writing, embodying a request, or direction to do something or not to do something. The term 'Order' is general and is comprehensive enough to include all kinds of orders including a formal order. The 'Order' includes every decision taken by the Court or the authority. The term 'Order' would indicate some expression of opinion which is to be carried out or enforced. It is the conclusion of a body, that is Court, authority or Tribunal upon any motion, if the word 'Order' is appreciated in its true perspective, then it would include in its sweep all the decisions taken at different stages. The Rules, Appointment Rules and the provisions of the Act do not provide that an appeal or revision shall lie against the final orders only. if that is so, against every order, an appeal may lie. 22. Looking to the scheme of the Act, the Selection Committee has to assess the candidates for interview and award marks in particular manner. After scrutiny of the applications received, categorywise merit list of the candidates belonging to the reserved and general category is to be prepared. The preparation of categorywise merit list infact is an order which decides the rights of the candidates at that point of time, if any person is aggrieved by non-inclusion of his name in the merit list or because of change of the category or change in the percentage of the general or reserved category, then he can certainly challenge the said order before the appellate forum. The marks are to be awarded in a particular manner. 60% marks of the percentage obtained in the qualifying examination provides the basic requirement. The marks are to be awarded in a particular manner. 60% marks of the percentage obtained in the qualifying examination provides the basic requirement. If there is some mis-calculation or proper marks have not been given out of the percentage, and a person is thrown out of the selection list or is not invited for the purposes of interview, then he can certainly challenge the award of wrong, illegal marks to him or extra marks given to any other candidate. This act on part of the Selection Committee, infact is an order because it decides the rights of the parties at the moment. 23. 25% marks are to be given for the teaching experience in the schools, If these marks are not given according to the entitlement of the candidate, then this action would affect the rights of such candidate and virtually would shut the doors for him. This again would decide the rights of such candidate at the moment and such decision of not granting the marks would be an order against the interest of such candidate. If a person is not invited for the interview because of some illegality or a, person who has worked minimum for one session has not been called for the interview or test, then again his rights are adversely affected and he is entitled to challenge the said action which infact is an order of the moment. So far as grant of 15% marks for oral test are concerned, a person aggrieved can certainly challenge the grant or refusal of the grant or low grant of the marks before the appellate forum, These 15% marks are to be granted for particular tests which include communication skills in local dialect, knowledge of local environment, general knowledge, training and teaching aptitude and any other test which the Selection Committee may deem fit. If excess marks are illegally granted in favour of certain persons, then this grant, being an order, can always be challenged before the appellate forum. Similarly non-grant of proper marks or grant of very low marks can also be challenged before the appellate forum as the same is an order which affects the rights of such candidate. If excess marks are illegally granted in favour of certain persons, then this grant, being an order, can always be challenged before the appellate forum. Similarly non-grant of proper marks or grant of very low marks can also be challenged before the appellate forum as the same is an order which affects the rights of such candidate. Whether the relatives have been selected or the member of the committee itself has been appointed or selected, can also be challenged before the appellate forum because the selection in itself is vitiated because of the illegalities committed by the selection committee or its members. In such a case principles of Audi alteram partem would apply with its full force. The appellate forum shall certainly interfere in such a matter where it is proved to its satisfaction that the relatives, kiths, kins or members of the selection committee have been selecte9 or appointed. It is not expected of a Selection Committee that contrary to the requirement of the law, it would go on obliging people contrary to the provisions of law. If it is proved to the satisfaction of the authority that unauthorized persons had taken part in the Selection Committee meeting be they be MLA or MP or their representatives, and by their sheer presence they have polluted the selection process, then the appellate forum would certainly step in and set aside such selection list. If it is brought to the notice of the appellate forum that the advertisement was for a particular post or for a particular subject or there was a specific reservation but the reservation percentage has been changed, then again the appellate forum would be entitled to intervene and set aside the illegalities by reversing the clock back with a further direction that the selection be made in accordance with the rules. 24. Whether the present are cases of gross injustice or not can always be seen by the appellate forum. 24. Whether the present are cases of gross injustice or not can always be seen by the appellate forum. So far as argument of Shri Thakur is concerned that the Collector is in seisin of the matter and is making illegal orders, suffice it to say that the petitioner can always appear before the said Collector and bring it to his notice that if the Collector is exercising the suo-motu revisional powers, then too he is not entitled to vary or reverse any order unless notice has been served on the parties interested and opportunity is given to them of being heard. It is directed that if such an application is made to the Collector who is exercising the suo-motu revisional powers, then the Collector shall permit such party to take part in the proceedings and shall also give them proper opportunity of being heard. Even otherwise, it is expected of a Collector that he would know the rules governing the powers of revision. If an authority has the powers of revision, then it can certainly exercise the said powers, but it cannot exercise the powers contrary to the provisions of law or the mandate issued by the law. If the Collector wants to exercise the suo-motu revisional powers, then he is bound to serve a notice on the parties interested, and is obliged to give them a proper opportunity of being heard. Even otherwise, if the petitioners represented by Shri D.S. Thakur feel like that the Collector is making illegal or bad orders or the orders are without jurisdiction, then they are certainly entitled to file an appeal under Rule 3(b) to the Commissioner. 25. So far as the question of entertainment of the petitions by this Court concerns, suffice it to say that the petitions have not been admitted for hearing, but show cause notices have been issued in such petitions. The question of alternative remedy has been raised for the first time by the counsel for the State. The petitions cannot be admitted on the ground of equality. If it is brought to the notice of the Court that the petitioners have a right to challenge the order before the proper forum in an appeal, then this Court ordinarily would not interfere in the matter, but would leave the parties to approach to the proper forum. The petitions cannot be admitted on the ground of equality. If it is brought to the notice of the Court that the petitioners have a right to challenge the order before the proper forum in an appeal, then this Court ordinarily would not interfere in the matter, but would leave the parties to approach to the proper forum. The questions which are raised in these petitions are basically based on facts. It would not be proper for this Court to interfere in cases where there are disputes relating to the facts or there is likelihood of the disputes relating to the facts. 26. As observed above, according to Rule 9 of Appeal & Revision Rules, the appellate or revisional authority is entitled to make such further enquiry. It can always call for the original records; can call for the selection list can ask the parties to file affidavits in support of their allegations or counter allegations, and may even record the statements of the parties. The powers which are given to the appellate or revisional authority are not available to the High Court under Article 226 or 227 of the Constitution of India. It would always be proper for a party to approach the appellate or revisional forum which is vested with the powers of enquiry because if the allegations are enquired into or the allegations are startling or the allegations make out a case for interference, then the appellate or revisional authority shall be bound to make interference. Even otherwise, the appellate authority shall be in a better position in comparison to the High Court because it has power to hold an enquiry. 27. So far as the question of chances being given to the persons who are placed lower in the waiting list are concerned, this question can also be raised before the appellate forum. Even if the whole selection is bad or is tainted with the colourable exercise of powers or is otherwise polluted or vitiated, then too the appellate or revisional authority can make an enquiry. Even if the whole selection is bad or is tainted with the colourable exercise of powers or is otherwise polluted or vitiated, then too the appellate or revisional authority can make an enquiry. If the persons have not been invited for interview, then they can certainly make a complaint to the appellate forum in form of an appeal that contrary to the provisions of the Appointment Rules, they were not invited for interview, and other candidates, if are aggrieved, can certainly raise an objection before the appellate/revisional forum that the bonus marks have not been given to them as per their entitlement. They can also say that less marks have been awarded to them to oblige and appoint particular persons who came in the category of blessed few or chosen few. If such allegations are made, then the appellate authority would certainly look into the matter and if an occasion arises, would certainly make an enquiry. If it is brought to the notice of the appellate authority that the appointing authority is not acting in accordance with law, then it can certainly exercise its appellate powers, and if the appellate powers are not available, then it can exercise the revisional powers and direct the appointing authority that it should act in accordance with the Appointment Rules. Whether the cases are of clear injustice or are tainted with illegality, the cases can be examined on their own merits by the appellate authority. 28. So far as submission of Shri Bhave concerns, it can be rejected outright because it is based on a misconception. The contention of Shri Bhave that selection list is not a final order is not correct. Infact the selection list or the list of the candidates found fit for extending invitation for interview are the orders. The rest are the ministerial acts. The Chief Executive Officer or any other person cannot run or go contrary to the said list. Once the Selection Committee says that particular persons be invited for interview, then that would be the order and invitation to such persons would be the ministerial acts. Similarly if the Selection Committee makes a selection list, then the said selection list is the final order and issuance of the appointment letters would be nothing, but a ministerial act. Once the Selection Committee says that particular persons be invited for interview, then that would be the order and invitation to such persons would be the ministerial acts. Similarly if the Selection Committee makes a selection list, then the said selection list is the final order and issuance of the appointment letters would be nothing, but a ministerial act. Shri Khare is justified in his submission that the execution of an order in a particular manner in itself is not an order. He is also right when he submits that communication of the order in itself is not an order. If a person has not been issued an invitation letter or an appointment letter, then he can certainly approach the appellate authority and say that the order is being violated, therefore, his grievances be remedied and proper orders be made by the appellate forum in his case. 29. So far as non-supply of the copy of the selection list is concerned, any aggrieved person is required to move a proper application to the authority for supply of the copy of the selection list. When the• legislature talks of transparency in the administration field and of right to have approach to the orders made by the authorities, then non-supply of the selection list cannot be taken to be proper on the part of the authorities. If the petitioners represented by Shri Mukhtar Ahmed moves/move application to the competent authority, then on payment of charges, if any, the authority shall be duty bound to supply the copy of the list to the said person/persons. 30. So far as contention of Shri R.N. Mehrotra is concerned that without appreciating the import of the meaning of 60% marks, excess marks were given, the contention cannot be considered in this petition because but for general allegation, no specific instances have been given. Even otherwise, this question can be raised before the appellate authority. Whether the Circular/Order dated 18.6.98, issued by the State Government, has been properly observed or not by the Selection Committies can again be made a ground of appeal before the appellate forum. 31. At this stage, it would again be necessary to consider the powers of the appellate authority. According to the provisions of law, the appellate authority is entitled to make such ft7rther enquiry as it may deem necessary, subject to the provisions of the Act and the Rules made thereunder. 31. At this stage, it would again be necessary to consider the powers of the appellate authority. According to the provisions of law, the appellate authority is entitled to make such ft7rther enquiry as it may deem necessary, subject to the provisions of the Act and the Rules made thereunder. If the appellate authority is satisfied that the case in its hands is a case where enquiry is a must, then it would certainly enter into the arena of the enquiry, and after the enquiry would come out with the positive facts. The order of the appellate authority, assuming if is final, can always be challenged before the High Court under Article 227 of the Constitution of India. At that point of time, this Court would at least have an order passed by the appellate authority and would not be at a loss to have the facts before it. Infact the appellate order would provide the allegations made, defence, the facts, the evidence and all other details which are required for exercising the powers. 32. In the opinion of this Court, it must be held that the remedy as provided in Rule 12 of the Appointment Rules is proper, alternative remedy. It is efficacious, speedy and expedient. 33. For the reasons aforesaid, in the opinion of this Court, these petitions must be disposed of with the directions as contained hereinafter :-- (i) Within one month from today, the petitioners may file an appeal before the appellate forum; if it is done, then question of limitation shall not be permitted to be raised by anybody; (ii) As the Rules provide and even otherwise the appellate forum has power to grant interim orders, the petitioners shall be entitled, if advised, to move applications for grant of interim orders/directions. If such applications are filed, those shall be decided on their own merits; (iii) After filing of the appeals, the notices shall be issued within three days, and to avoid unnecessary delay in the matter of service, the notices shall be served preferably within fifteen days on the parties, and if certain persons have been joined in their personal capacity, then the notices shall be served upon them through the appointing authority or through the Selection Committee; such persons after the notice, would be required to file their defences or replies within further fifteen days; (iv) If the appellate authority is of the opinion that an enquiry into the matter is to be made, then the same shall be made within one month from the date of submission of the defence by the respondent; (v) The appellate authority shall be entitled to send for the complete records relating to the selection and its complete process. The appellate authority would be entitled to ask the parties to file their affidavits in support of their allegations and counter allegations and may also record oral evidence, if an occasion arises; (vi) It is expected of the appellate authority that it shall dispose of the matter/appeal finally within a period of four months from the date of filing of the appeal irrespective of the burden of the work, which it has because neither the rights of the candidates can be sacrificed nor the students can be permitted to suffer because of non-appointment of the Shikshakarmis. 34. The petitions are disposed of accordingly with no order as to costs.