In this application under Article 226 of the Constitution, the petitioners have prayed for quashing the letters dated 30.7.98 and 25.9.98 issued by the Under Secretary and Deputy Secretary to the Govt. of Assam, Food and Civil Supplies a Department to the Assam Public Service Commission (in short APSC) requesting the APSC to recommend 16 candidates and 3 candidates respectively for the vacancies in the post of Inspector of Legal Metrology pursuant to the advertise­ment dated 26.11.96 and for quashing the notice dated 26.9.98 issued by the Assam Public Service Commission calling candidates for interview for vacancies in the post of Inspector of Legal Metrology beyond the quota under the Rules. 2. The facts briefly are that the petitioners are presently working as Assistants in the Department of Food and Civil Supplies, Govt. of Assam and belong to the Ministerial cadre of the Govt. of Assam in the said department. Under the Assam Weights and Measures Service Rules, 1981 as amended, 25% of the strength of cadre of Inspector of Legal Metrology are filled up by promotion in accordance with Rules 11 and 13 of the Assam Weights and Measures Service Rules, 1981 (in short the Rules). Further under Rule 5 (b) of the said Rules 75% of the quota of Inspector of Legal Metrology is to be filled up by way of direct recruitment in accordance with Rules 6 and 17 of the Rules. For the purpose of such direct recruitment to the post of Inspector of Legal Metrology an advertisement was issued by the Assam Public Service Commission on 20.11.96 inviting applications for 7 (seven) temporary posts of Inspector of Legal Metrology under the organi­sation of Legal Metrology under the Food and Civil Supplies (A) Department. Pursuant to the advertisement several candidates including respondent Nos. 4 to 9 applied to the Assam Public Service Commission. When the selection process was on, the Govt. of Assam in the Food and Civil Supplies Department sent a letter dated 30th July, 1998 to the Assam Public Service Commission stating therein that the vacancies in the post of Inspector of Legal Metrology has in the meanwhile increased to 16 (sixteen), and requesting the APSC to recommend the list of candidates for recruitments to the said 16 (sixteen) posts of Inspector of Legal Metrology. Thereafter another letter dated 25th September, 1995 was sent by the Govt. Thereafter another letter dated 25th September, 1995 was sent by the Govt. of Assam in the Food and Civil Supplies Department to the APSC stating therein that 3 (three) more posts of Inspector of Metrology are likely to fall vacant due to promotion of Inspector to higher rank and requesting the APSC to recommend 3 more candidates in addition to the 16 candidates for which the earlier communication had been sent. Aggrieved by the said two letters dated 30th July, 1998 and 25.9.98 of the Govt. of Assam, Food and Civil Supplies Department, the petitioners have prayed for appropriate relief. 3. At the hearing, Mr. MK Choudhury, learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that it is well settled by the Supreme Court that no recommendation can be made for appointment to the posts which have not been advertised, except in exceptional circumstances. He further submitted that where recruitment is sought to make on the basis of a selection in excess of the number of posts advertised, the authorities must show to the Court the exceptional circumstances under which h such recruitment is being done. Mr. Choudhury argued that if such recruitment in excess of the advertised posts is allowed, the petitioners, who are waiting for their promotion to the post of Inspector of Legal Metrology, will be affected. He pointed out that every person who is appointed by direct recruitment in excess of the advertised posts will become senior to the petitioners as and when they are promoted. He also referred to the provisions of Rule 5 (b) of the Rules to show that the petitioners were entitled to a quota of the vacancies in the post of Inspector of Legal Metrology which are reserved for promotion, and that any direct recruit­ment in excess of the advertised posts may encroach into the said quota reserved for promotion. He produced before the Court a copy of the letter dated 18.11.97 of tile Controller of Legal Metrology to the Secretary to the Govt. of Assam, Food and Civil Supplies Department, wherein a request has been made to make some promotion from amongst the Ministerial cadre to the post of Inspector of Legal Metrology even in relaxation of the rules under Rule 27 of the Rules. 4. Mr. DK Misra, learned counsel for respondent Nos. of Assam, Food and Civil Supplies Department, wherein a request has been made to make some promotion from amongst the Ministerial cadre to the post of Inspector of Legal Metrology even in relaxation of the rules under Rule 27 of the Rules. 4. Mr. DK Misra, learned counsel for respondent Nos. 4 to 9, on the other hand, submitted that Rule 5 (b) of the Rules shows that a quota of 25% of the strength of the cadre of Inspector of Legal Metrology has been fixed for being filled up by promotion from amongst the Ministerial cadre. He stated that the cadre strength of Inspector of Legal Metrology as indicated in Schedule 1 to the Rules is 62 (sixty two) and 25% of the said cadre strength of 62 will work out to 15.5. As against the quota 15.5 candidates who had been appointed to the post of Inspector of Legal Metrology by way of promotion are 15. According to Mr. Misra there Was no possibility of encroachment into the quota of the 25% of cadre strength of Inspector of Legal Metrology reserved for promotion from amongst the Ministerial cadre. 5. Regarding recruitment to posts in excess of the advertised vacancies, he contended that even the Supreme Court has allowed recruitment in excess of the advertised posts in some circumstances. He also relied on the decision of the Division Bench of this Court in Debabrat Borgohain & others vs. Dilip Hazarika & others, 1996 (3) GLT 310 (1997 (1) GLJ 62). in which after considering various authorities cited by the learned counsel of the parties, the Division Bench held, inter alia, that the State can deviate from the advertisement and make appointments to the posts falling vacant in excess of the vacancies advertised only in an emergent situation and that too by taking the policy decision in that behalf. I have also heard Mr. N. Dutta, learned counsel for the APSC and Mr. KP Pathak for respondent Nos. 4 and 5. 6. I have also heard Mr. N. Dutta, learned counsel for the APSC and Mr. KP Pathak for respondent Nos. 4 and 5. 6. As a general proposition of law, appointments to posts in excess of the advertised vacancies can not be made by the authorities as such appointments would be contrary to the rights of citizens to equal opportunity in matters of public appointment under Article 16 of the Constitution, particularly of those who became qualified for consideration for such appointment after the last date fixed by the advertisement for submission of applications. In exceptional circumstances, however, Courts have permitted appointment to posts in excess of the advertisement after taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case. In the present case, the Rules have been made by the Governor under the proviso to Article 309 of the Constitution providing for direct recruitment to the vacancies in the post of Inspector of Metrology. Rule 6 (1) of the Rules which is relevant is extracted herein below: “6. Direct recruitment:(1) Direct recruitment to the cadre of Inspector against 75 percent of the strength of the cadre, shall be made by the Governor on the basis of recommendations made by the Commission in accordance with the procedure hereinafter provided: (a) Before the end of each year the Govt. shall make an assessment regarding the likely number of vacancies to be filled up by direct recruitment during the next year and shall intimate the same to the Commission together with the details about reservation for candidates belonging to Scheduled Castes, Scheduled Tribes or any other category as laid down by the Govt. as provided under Rule 16 and about carry forward of such reservation; (b) The Govt. shall simultaneously request the Commission to recommend a list of candidates for direct recruitment, in order of preference; (c) The Commission shall make a selection in accordance with the scheme of selection prescribed by the Govt. in consultation with the Commission. The Commission may hold such test or interview and undertake scrutiny of certificates and other documents, as may be considered necessary; (d) The Commission shall furnish to the Govt. a list of candidates recommended by it in order of preference, found suitable for direct recruitment. in consultation with the Commission. The Commission may hold such test or interview and undertake scrutiny of certificates and other documents, as may be considered necessary; (d) The Commission shall furnish to the Govt. a list of candidates recommended by it in order of preference, found suitable for direct recruitment. The number of candidates in such a list may be such as may be found suitable by the Commission for appointment; (e) The Commission shall simultaneously publish the list in the Assam Gazette and at such other place the Commission may consider proper. (2) The list mentioned in clauses (d) and (e) of sub-rule (1) above shall remain valid for 12 calendar months from the date of recommendation. (3) In the event of the Commission being unable to recommend sufficient number of candidates to fill up the vacancies in a year, it shall in consultation with the Appointing Authority repeat the procedure as mentioned herein before in the sub-rule (1) of this rule, for recommending a subsequent list in the year. Provided that the Appointing Authority shall not make appointment of any candidate from the subsequent list until all the candidates of the earlier list of the same year, eligible for appointment, have been offered the appointment.” 7. A bare reading of Rule 6 (1) (a) quoted above will show that before the end of each year, the Govt. has to make an assessment regarding likely number of vacancies to be filled up-by direct recruitment during the next year and has to intimate the same to the APSC. Rule 6 (2) would further show that after the APSC recommends a list of candidates for direct recruitment such list will remain valid for 12 calendar months from the date of recommendation. Rule 6 (3) of the rules quoted above will show that if APSC is unable to recommend sufficient number of candidates to be filled up in a year, it shall in consultation with the Recruiting Authority, repeat the procedure under sub-rule (1) for recommending a subsequent list in the year. The statutory scheme under Rule 6 for direct recruitment, therefore, is that at the end of each year the selection process has to start to fill up the likely number of vacancies during the next year. 8. The statutory scheme under Rule 6 for direct recruitment, therefore, is that at the end of each year the selection process has to start to fill up the likely number of vacancies during the next year. 8. In the instant case, the advertisement was issued on 20.11.96 and hence all the vacancies which had arisen and which would arise up to the end of the year 1997 could be filled up pursuant to the advertisement in accordance with the scheme contained in Rule 6 of the Rules as discussed above. An affidavit has been filed by the Deputy Secretary to the Govt. of Assam, Food and Civil a Supplies Department before this Court today stating specifically in paragraph 5 that the total number of vacancies in the cadre of Inspector of Legal Metrology for the year 1993 was 4 and for the year 1996 was 10 and in the year 1997, 2 more vacancies have occurred. In the said paragraph 5 of the affidavit it is further stated that 3 more vacancies are likely to occur in the year 1999 due to promotion to the next higher cadre from the cadre of Inspector of Legal Metrology.” Thus, the total number of vacancies which can be filled up pursuant to the impugned advertisement issued at the end of the year 1996 would be 16 which had arisen and which arose till the end of the year 1997. 9. Regarding direct recruitment to the posts of Inspector of Legal Metrology in excess quota of 75% of the cadre of Inspector fixed, for direct recruitment so as to encroach into quota of 25% of the cadre of the Inspector of Legal Metrology fixed for promotion from amongst the Ministerial cadre, there does not appear to be any dispute over the factual position that as many as 15 persons have been promoted from the Ministerial cadre to the post of Inspector of Legal Metrology. Since 15.5 constitutes 25% of the total cadre strength of 62 of Inspector of Metrology, the apprehension of the petitioners that their quota of 25% of the d cadre strength would be encroached by direct recruitment pursuant to the advertisement and pursuant to the impugned letters of the Govt. of Assam Food and Civil Supplies Department to the APSC is misconceived. In fact by the letter dated 18.11.96 of the Controller of Legal Metrology to the Secretary, Govt. of Assam Food and Civil Supplies Department to the APSC is misconceived. In fact by the letter dated 18.11.96 of the Controller of Legal Metrology to the Secretary, Govt. of Assam, Food and Civil Supplies Department, a request has been made to the Govt. to arrange for promotion of departmental candidates by relaxing the provision of the Rules under Rule 27 of the rules as the department was running short of Inspectors. This would show that the quota for promotion from departmental candidates has already been exhausted. As to whether or not the Govt. would relax the provisions of the rules fixing the quota for promotion of departmental candidates is not for the Court to suggest but for the Govt. to decide. 10. Subject to the aforesaid observation, this writ petition is disposed of with a direction that the State-respondents will not fill up more than 16 number of vacancies in the post of Inspector of Metrology by direct recruitment on the basis of selection made by the Assam Public Service Commission pursuant to its advertisement dated 20.11.96. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case the parties shall bear their own costs.