GODA RAGHURAM, J. ( 1 ) THE petitioner is presently working as deputy Secretary with the A,p. State legislative Assembly. In W. P. 2141 of 1991 he seeks a direction to appoint him as assistant Secretary against the existing vacancy and in W. P. No. 9055 of 1998 he seeks a declaration that the action of the respondent in not promoting him with effect from 1976 and not giving him future promotions in accordance with pre-1979 rules and now seeking to apply the ad hoc rules framed in G. O. Ms. No. 66, dated 19-10-1983, is illegal and arbitrary. ( 2 ) THE two writ petitions involve substantially inter-connected factual and legal positions and are disposed of by this common judgment. ( 3 ) HEARD Sri A. V. Sesha Sai, the learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri madanmohan Rao, the learned Government pleader for Home. ( 4 ) THE petitioner is a graduate in Law and Post Graduate in three disciplines. In march 1960 he was initially appointed as a typist in the Office of the State Editor, district Gazetteers (Revenue Department) and in the said temporary post he worked till 28-2-1962. Thereafter, With effect from 1-3-1962 he was temporarily appointed as steno-Typist in the Office of the Board of revenue wherein he served as such up to 7-5-1962. During the above period he was selected by A. P. Public Service Commission and appointed as Steno Typist in the Board of Revenue wherein he commenced service in the said category with effect from 8-5-1962. Thereafter, with effect from 16-9-1963 he was appointed as Steno-Typist in the Industries Department and with effect from 28-4-1964 the petitioner was appointed as U. D. Stenographer in the general Administration Department of the secretariat. His probation was declared in the said category with effect from 8-2-1966. He continued as U. D. Stenographer in general Administration Department till 12-3-1967. ( 5 ) WITH effect from 13-3-1967 the petitioner was appointed by transfer as an english Reporter in the Legislature department. The initial rules governing the conditions of service to the post of Assistant secretary in the A. P. Legislative Assembly, which is the next higher post to that of reporter, have been published in g. O. Ms. No. 68, Home Department dated 10-1-1955 (the 1955 Rules ). The initial rules governing the conditions of service to the post of Assistant secretary in the A. P. Legislative Assembly, which is the next higher post to that of reporter, have been published in g. O. Ms. No. 68, Home Department dated 10-1-1955 (the 1955 Rules ). These rules have been issued by the Governor in purported exercise of powers available under article 187 (3) of the Constitution of India. The post of Assistant Secretary is set out as category III in the constitution of the service namely, the Officers of the A. P. Legislature. Appointment to the post of assistant Secretary is either by recruitment by transfer from any other class or service or in special cases by direct recruitment. Rule 4 of 1955 Rules, which deals with qualification for appointment to various posts in the category of Officers of legislature, stipulates that for appointment to the post of Assistant Secretary from the category of Reporters in the Legislature department, a candidate must put in at least five years of service as Reporter in the legislature Department. Certain other qualifications are also enumerated which the petitioner indisputably possesses. ( 6 ) ON the basis of the above rules, the petitioner entertained an expectation that having become eligible for consideration for promotion as Assistant Secretary in me year 1972, the year in which he completed five years of service in the category of Reporter, he would be promoted. ( 7 ) A vacancy in the category of Assistant secretary arose with effect from 1-6-1979 on the retirement of the incumbent one mr. R. N. Sarma with effect from 31-5-1979 and Mr. B. Krishna Murthy, Section Officer was temporarily appointed as Assistant secretary by orders issued under g. O. Rt. No. 78, dated 8-6-1979. It was the petitioner s grievance that he ought to have been regularly appointed as an Assistant secretary. ( 8 ) IN G. O. MS. NO. 82, dated 4-9-1979, A. P. Legislature Service Rules were issued by the Governor of Andhra Pradesh in purported exercise of powers available under Article 187 (3) of the Constitution of india, (for short 1979 Rules ) after consultation with the Speaker of the A. P. Legislative Assembly and the Chairman of the A. P. Legislative Council. NO. 82, dated 4-9-1979, A. P. Legislature Service Rules were issued by the Governor of Andhra Pradesh in purported exercise of powers available under Article 187 (3) of the Constitution of india, (for short 1979 Rules ) after consultation with the Speaker of the A. P. Legislative Assembly and the Chairman of the A. P. Legislative Council. Under the 1979 rules the post of Assistant Secretary in the legislature was set out in Class III of the service constituted under Rule 2 and was designated as Assistant Secretaries to government. The method of appointment to the various posts in the service has been set out in Annexure-I of 1979 Rules. In respect of the post of Assistant Secretaries, the 1979 Rules ordained that the appointments shall be by the method of promotion from a member belonging to class IV. Class IV is the post of Section officers, Reporters and Translators. These rules incorporated a quota whereby out of every four vacancies of Assistant secretaries, three vacancies were to be filled up by promotion of Section Officers and one vacancy by promotion of a Reporter or a Translator. As a consequence of 1979 rules, the promotional avenue to the categories of Translators and Reporters have been diminuted. ( 9 ) AGGRIEVED by 1979 Rules the petitioner and ten others filed W. P. No. 6562 of 1979. A Division Bench of this Court by the judgment dated 27-6-1980 allowed the writ petition and declared the 1979 Rules as ultra vires the provisions of Article 187 of the Constitution. The ratio enunciated by the Division Bench in invalidating 1979 rules was that inasmuch as the 1979 Rules characterized the Officers of the State legislature constituted under the said rules as Officers of the Government and statutory rules made in general for the Government services in the A. P. State and Subordinate service Rules were also made applicable the independence of the Legislature secretariat and its staff carefully nurtured and engendered in the enactment of the constitution which found expression in article 187 of the Constitution has been subverted. The question of the quota prescribed for promotion to the posts of assistant Secretaries between the Section officers, Translators and Reporters was neither urged nor considered by this Court. The question of the quota prescribed for promotion to the posts of assistant Secretaries between the Section officers, Translators and Reporters was neither urged nor considered by this Court. It is the synoptic statement at the Bar that as against the above judgment of this Court an s. L. P. has been filed and it has been dismissed by the Supreme Court and the judgment of the Division Bench of this court, referred to above, has become final. ( 10 ) IN G. O. Ms. No. 66, Legislature department dated 9-10-1983 the Governor of Andhra Pradesh issued the A. P. Legislature Service (ad hoc) Rules, 1983. Rule 2 of these rules states that these rules shall be deemed to have come into force on various dates set out therein in respect of various aspects covered by the rules. In so far as the posts of Assistant Secretaries are concerned, which is constituted as Class-III in 1983 Ad hoc Rules, the rules have been ordained to have come into effect on 4-9-1979 by virtue of the specification in rule 2 (v) of 1983 ad hoc Rules. The vires of this rule has not been challenged in this writ petition. ( 11 ) THE learned Counsel for the petitioner has urged that 1983 ad hoc Rules have been issued only with a view to subvert the expectations of the petitioner in the matter of consideration of his promotion to the post of Assistant Secretary and that since the 1983 ad hoc Rules has been effectuated with retrospective effect from 1979, the rules should not be given effect to and that in that premise his case be directed to be considered for promotion to the post of Assistant Secretary with effect from 1976 when he was called for interview for the said post by the A. P. P. S. C. ( 12 ) THE 1983 Rules have been issued under Article 187 (3) of the Constitution which is in pari materia the proviso to article 309 of the Constitution. The status of a rule made under proviso to Article 309 is well settled by the decision of the Supreme court in B. S. Vadera vs. Union of India wherein it has been held that rule made by the President or the Governor, as the case may be, under proviso to Article 309 can be effectuated with retrospective effect as it has the same effect as that of a legislation made under Article 309 (1) of the constitution of India. Having regard to the identity of phraseology and constitutional intent as apparent from the language in article 187 (3) with that of the provisions of proviso to Article 309, it must be held that a rule made by the Governor under article 187 (3) of the Constitution can be effectuated with retrospective effect. The power to make retrospective rule under article 187 (3) of the Constitution is thus beyond challenge. It is equally well settled that no rule made under proviso to article 309 is susceptible to challenge on the ground of being vitiated by malice in fact. The same principle would be equally applicable to a rule made under article 187 (3) of the Constitution having regard to the identity in status of the rules made under these two provisions. ( 13 ) IN any view of the matter, it is dearly evident that retrospective effect was given to the 1983 ad hoc rules to be effective from 4-9-1979 on account of 1979 Rules having been invalidated by the Court on the ground of being not in conformity with the constitutional injunctions flowing from article 187 of the Constitution of India. It is settled principle that the lacunae pointed out, in a curial determination could be rectified by exercise of legislative power vide decision of the Supreme Court in Smt. Indira Nehru Gandhi vs. Raj Narain. None of the grounds urged by the learned Counsel for the petitioner, therefore, commend themselves to this Court to warrant a conclusion that the retrospective effectuation of the 1983 Ad hoc Rules is vitiated by any infirmity. ( 14 ) IT is stated that the petitioner has been promoted as Assistant Secretary in the year 1994 and thereafter as Deputy secretary in the year 1998. ( 14 ) IT is stated that the petitioner has been promoted as Assistant Secretary in the year 1994 and thereafter as Deputy secretary in the year 1998. In these wit petitions the relief sought for is for notional promotion to the category of Assistant secretary with effect from 1976 and on that basis early notional promotion to the category of Deputy Secretary and as logical corollary of such advancement and for consideration to the post of Secretary in due turn based on such notional seniority, ( 15 ) IN the light of the analysis above, there are no merits in the writ petitions, which are accordingly dismissed but in the circumstances without costs.