ORDER Leave granted. 2. As nobody is appearing for the respondents, we could only hear learned counsel for the appellant - State of Orissa. We propose to dispose of this appeal without the aid of arguments on behalf of the respondents. 3. The State of Orissa has issued a Notification (containing the Resolution adopted by the Government) separating the Orissa Medical Education Service into three cadres. That Notification was challenged by the respondents before the High Court in a writ petition on the ground that the decision was arbitrary, whimsical and unreasonable. By the impugned judgment, the High Court set aside the said Resolution. However, it was made clear that the impugned judgment will not prevent the State from formulating any other policy for bifurcating the cadre of Orissa Medical Education Service. 4. The Division Bench of the High Court has chosen to quash the impugned Resolution only on the premise that the Resolution is likely to impair the concept of Orissa Medical Education Service. We do not find any rationale in the impugned judgment of the Division Bench to usurp the powers of the government in making or deciding on policy matters. It is to be pointed out that there is no finding that the bifurcation would hit any provisions of the Constitution or that it is not a matter falling within the purview of the powers of the State Government. It is impermissible for the High Court to interfere with the policy matters merely because the High Court feels that a better policy would be more beneficial to the Service. 5. It is pertinent to point out that, even according to the High Court, it is not objectionable to bifurcate the Services. That is why, in the last paragraph of the impugned judgment, the High Court gave freedom to the State to formulate any other policy to bifurcate the cadre. If that be so, it is not within the domain of the judicial review to annul a policy decision of the Executive merely because some other policy could be a better proposition. 6. We are unable to sustain the impugned judgment of the High Court. We, therefore, allow this appeal and set aside the judgment under challenge. No order as to costs. Appeal allowed. ************** Parallel Citations of other Journals : State of Orissa v. Malaya Ranjan Baral, 2001(8) Supreme 465 00025