Judgment :- K.A. Abdul Gafoor, J. Petitioners in these Original Petitions are included in the rank list prepared by the Public Service Commission for appointment to the post of Executive Officer Grade II in the Panchayath Department. Ext. P2 in O.P. 3552/97 is the list, in question. The list had been published on 12.3.96. It was prepared on the basis of a recruitment process which commenced in terms of Ext.P1 notification dated 21.10.89. At that time filling up of the post of Executive Officers in the Panchayath in the State was governed by the rules issued in notification No. LA 14-290875/57/L&LAD dated 5th September 1958 in terms of T-C Panchayath Act, 1950. R.2 thereof provides that there shall be three grades of Panchayath Executive Officers namely Special grade, First Grade and Second Grade and that "Government may by order, fix the scale of pay and the number of posts in each grade from time to time" (emphasis supplied). Recruitment is governed by R.3 thereof. The entire vacancies in the posts of Special Grade Executive Officer and Executive Officer Grade I shall be filled up only by promotion. Direct recruitment is available only in respect of Executive Officer Grade II. Fifty per cent of the posts by appointment by selection by the Public Service Commission from among the Head Clerks, Panchayath Assistants, Bill Collectors and Panchayath Clerks in service with total 10 years of service, and again 40% by direct recruitment by the Public Service Commission from open market. Ten per cent Of the posts is reserved for appointment by promotion. Thus, out of every ten posts of the Executive Officer Grade II in the concerned districts, five shall be filled up by departmental candidates through direct recruitment and four by direct recruitment from open market. The ratio is thus always fixed on the basis of cadre strength. The petitioners in these cases are candidates included in the rank list prepared by the Public Service Commission from open market as well as direct recruitment from service candidates, relating to Thiruvananthapuram district, as it was district-wise category. Five posts were notified. Notification was as mentioned earlier, on 21.10.89. 2. While the recruitment process was on the way, new Panchayath Raj Act came into force. That resulted in new special rules displacing the rules issued in the notification referred to above, under the T.C. Panchayath Act. Five posts were notified. Notification was as mentioned earlier, on 21.10.89. 2. While the recruitment process was on the way, new Panchayath Raj Act came into force. That resulted in new special rules displacing the rules issued in the notification referred to above, under the T.C. Panchayath Act. The new rules were notified on 16.6.94 retrospectively from 1.1.90. As per the new rules, there are no posts of Executive Officers of different grades. The Executive Officers were re-designated as Secretaries of Grama Panchayats. As per the new rules there are only two grades namely First Grade Secretaries and Secretaries, depending upon the status of the Panchayats. Direct recruitment is in respect of the Secretaries alone and that too to 40% from among the open market. The remaining 60% of the posts are reserved for promotion. 3. When Ext. P2 list was brought into force on 12.3.96, there was no post for which recruitment was notified. That became the post of Secretary and the post of Secretary included in the erstwhile posts of Special Grade Executive Officer and Executive Officer Grade II as well as Grade I. The Public Service Commission advised only candidates against the vacancies already reported prior to the notification. Thus only five candidates from both the lists were advised and consequently they were appointed. No further vacancies were reported by the Department as no posts of Executive Officer Grade II exist. The petitioners are ranked top in the list. As they did not get advice memo nor appointment order, they have approached this Court with these writ petitions. There is no challenge to the new special rules. 4. The petitioners contend that the qualifications for the post of Executive Officer Grade II as contained in Ext. P1 notification and that for the Secretaries as per the new special rules are one and the same; and new special rules only redesignate the post of Panchayath Executive Officer. Ext. P2 list shall be operated to fill up the vacancies that are existing in the category of Secretary, Grama Panchayat. Therefore, they shall be advised. The attempt of the department to conduct separate recruitment for the post of Secretary, Grama Panchayats during the currency of Ext. P2 list is illegal and that will defeat the rights of the petitioners. Ext. P2 list shall be operated to fill up the vacancies that are existing in the category of Secretary, Grama Panchayat. Therefore, they shall be advised. The attempt of the department to conduct separate recruitment for the post of Secretary, Grama Panchayats during the currency of Ext. P2 list is illegal and that will defeat the rights of the petitioners. Therefore, the inaction on the part of the Government and department not to fill up the existing vacancies of Secretary, Grama Panchayats from out of Ext. P2 list offends the rights of the petitioners under Art.16 of the Constitution of India. 5. A candidate included in a list will have only a right to be considered for appointment and by reason of inclusion of the name of candidate in the list give no vested right, is created. This is an accepted position. The petitioners cannot get the reliefs as prayed for on that ground itself. 6. The petitioners were included in a list prepared pursuant to selection process for appointment to the post of Executive Officer Grade II. No such category is in existence when Ext. P2 list was brought into force on 12.3.96. The contention of the petitioner that there is only a mere change of designation of post as Secretary also cannot be accepted because as per the new rule, 40% of the entire posts of Secretaries in the Grama Panchayats are reserved for direct recruitment. This include the erstwhile Executive Officer Grade I as well as Grade II. There is change in the method of appointment as well. In the old special rules, departmental candidates were entitled to be directly recruited against the 50% of the posts and 40% alone was available for open recruitment. As per the new special rules, there is no special reservation even for departmental candidates. Total of the 40% of the vacancies are reserved for direct recruitment from open market. Thus, there is change in the method of appointment as well. Merely because the qualifications were one and the same, it cannot be stated that the new special rule envisages only re-designation and nothing else. 7. A survey of old Panchayath Act and New Panchayath Raj Act reveals that the Secretary is vested with more power. New Panchayath Raj Act was brought into force in terms of Part IX of the Constitution of India. 7. A survey of old Panchayath Act and New Panchayath Raj Act reveals that the Secretary is vested with more power. New Panchayath Raj Act was brought into force in terms of Part IX of the Constitution of India. The Secretaries in the Grama Panchayats will have more extensive powers than that of the erstwhile Panchayats. So, the post now existing is not the post of Executive Officer Grade II for which Ext. P1 notification was issued for recruitment. On that ground, petitioners cannot aspire to be advised to the post of Secretary, Grama Panchayat from Ext. P2 list. 8. Even otherwise also, the petitioners cannot aspire so. When there is extensive change to the recruitment rules the list prepared based on the earlier recruitment rule cannot be followed to fill up the vacancies or posts newly created or existing on the basis of the new rules. This aspect has been considered by the Supreme Court in Rajasthan Public Service Commission v. Chanan Ram & Ann (AIR 1998 SC 2251). There, an amendment was issued to the Rajasthan State Agricultural Marketing Service Rules, on 19.4.95. New post of Marketing Officer was created in place of Assistant Director. The Public Service Commission commenced the recruitment process as per notification dated 5.11.93 for direct recruitment to the post of Asst. Director. The Supreme Court in the said decision held as follows: "Despite this clear case made out by the Rajasthan Public Service Commission before the Division Bench of the High Court and despite the fact that the said case was clearly borne out from the statutory rules as amended in April 1995 the High Court in the impugned judgment has taken the view that the posts of Asst. Directors (Jr.) appear to have been re-designated as Marketing Officers meaning thereby there was only change of nomenclature. It is difficult to appreciate this line of reasoning. Not only the posts of Asst. Directors (Jr.) got abolished and substituted by new posts of Marketing Officers but it is the new post of Marketing Officer which became the feeder post for 100% promotion from the said newly created post to the post of Asst. Director which also was a newly created post in the place of the erstwhile post of Asst, Director (Sr..). Directors (Jr.) got abolished and substituted by new posts of Marketing Officers but it is the new post of Marketing Officer which became the feeder post for 100% promotion from the said newly created post to the post of Asst. Director which also was a newly created post in the place of the erstwhile post of Asst, Director (Sr..). It must, therefore be held that the earlier advertisement of 5th November, 1993 Annexure P1 became infructuous and could not be relied upon for sustaining any further process or recruitment pursuant to the said infructuous advertisement seeking to recruit persons to posts which no longer existed in Rajasthan State Marketing Service after April 1995". When this proposition is applied to the facts of these cases, necessarily, the petitioners do not reveal a case for interference. 9. A Division Bench of this Court in Mohammed Najim v. State of Kerala (1993 (2) KLT 721) has also examined a similar issue, concerning appointment to the post of Amin. Notification was issued on 12.3.1995 by the Public Service Commission for direct recruitment to the post of Amin, as provided for the Kerala Judicial Ministerial Service Rules at that time. Later the rule was amended 0116.12.1985 with retrospective effect from 24.2.1981, making it clear that the post of Amin shall be filled up by promotion of Attenders and direct recruitment shall be resorted to only if no candidates are available for promotion. Still later in 1988, the PSC published the lists. The candidates were not advised because of the amendment to the rules effected on 6.12.1985. It was in the above circumstances, the candidates approached this Court, and the Division Bench held that, "Since the amendment was retrospective, and since no 'constitutional rights of the petitioners are effected, they cannot be heard to say that they should be appointed as Amins from out of the select list, ignoring the amendment. The petitioners' right is only to take their chance under the amended rule, for appointment, if no suitable attenders or last grade servants are available. The reliefs claimed in the Writ Petitions are not liable to be granted." Thus, when an amendment takes place, the persons included in the rank list prepared based on a notification issued prior to such amendment cannot get a right to be appointed. The reliefs claimed in the Writ Petitions are not liable to be granted." Thus, when an amendment takes place, the persons included in the rank list prepared based on a notification issued prior to such amendment cannot get a right to be appointed. It is more so, when the post itself is a different post and when there is total change of rules as in this case. 10. Added to this is a decision in O.P. No. 15650/96 concerning the recruitment to the very same post in the Wayanad District. It had been held in that case, "The trend of the Supreme Court ruling is to the effect that any vacancies which arose after the publication of the ranked list must be filled up by inviting applications afresh from the candidates who became eligible to apply to these posts. Otherwise, it will be a negation of the equality of opportunity enshrined under Art.16 of the Constitution." 11. In this case, the petitioners bring to my notice Ext. R2 (a), a communication issued from Government addressed to the Director of Panchayats. It is revealed that there was a discussion on the subject and it was decided that the vacancies that had arisen between 1989 and 16.6.94, when the new special rules are promulgated, in the category of Executive Officer Grade II shall be filled up from among the candidates in Ext. P2 list. Therefore, Government is bound on the basis of the premise contained in Ext. R2(a), to examine the cadre strength of Executive Officer Grade II fixed in terms of R.2 of the old rules and ascertain how much direct recruits were necessary at the relevant time. If there was deficiency, the Government shall report such number of vacancies in order to fulfil the quota for departmental candidates and open market candidates as the case may be against such cadre strength namely 50% out of the cadre strength for the former and 40% of the cadre strength for the latter, of the erstwhile Executive Officer Grade II. Government Pleader submits that there was only one post to be filled up by direct recruitment during the period from 1989 to 1994 after appointing five candidates against the vacancies notified. But, this is contested by the petitioners. Government Pleader submits that there was only one post to be filled up by direct recruitment during the period from 1989 to 1994 after appointing five candidates against the vacancies notified. But, this is contested by the petitioners. Therefore, the Director shall ascertain the number of posts as mentioned above and find out whether there were still posts available for direct recruitment for departmental or open market as the case may be. 12. On assessment if it is found that there were deficiency in the respective quota for Thiruvananthapuram District, that shall be intimated to the Public Service Commission. There upon the Public Service Commission shall take equal number of vacancies that has been reported when the Government had addressed the Public Service Commission for direct recruitment to the post of Secretary, Grama Panchayat as reporting of vacancies of Executive Officer Grade II and equal number of candidates shall be advised against such number of vacancies so intimated from out of Ext. P2 list. Equal from the direct recruitment notified by the Public Service Commission for the post of Secretary, Grama Panchayat. O.Ps. are disposed of as above. No costs.