S. R. NAYAK, J. ( 1 ) THE applicants in O. A. No. 5496 of 2002 pending on the file of the A. P. Administrative Tribunal, Hyderabad (for short, the Tribunal), have preferred this writ petition questioning the legality and validity of the interim order dated 13-6-2002 made by the Tribunal in the aforementioned orginal Application. The Original application was filed praying for the following main and interim reliefs:"hence, it is prayed that this Hon ble tribunal in the interests of justice be pleased to call for the records relating to and connected with G. O. Ms. No. 245, revenue (Endowments-I) Department dated 8-5-2002 of the 1st respondent and quash or set aside so far as it relates to providing channel by method of transfer by deputation of Revenue personnel in the posts included in category 3 and 4 of Rule 3 of the special Rules of the A. P. Charitable and Hindu Religious Institutions and endowments Service Rules, 2002 by holding them as arbitrary, illegal, improper, irrational and unsustainable apart from being violative of Arts. 14 and 16 of the Constitution of India and consequently set aside the consequential G. O. Rt. No. 1019 revenue (Endowments-I) Department dated 5-6-2002 of the 1st respondent and the Proceedings Rc. No. E1/45037/2001 dated 7-6-2002 of the 3rd respondent in having posted the unofficial respondents 4 to 7 as executive Officers in the Endowments department and pass such other further order or orders as this Hon ble tribunal may deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the case. Pending disposal of the O. A. , it is also prayed that this Hon ble Tribunal in the interests of justice be pleased to suspend the operation of the G. O. Rt. No. 1019, Revenue (Endowments-I) department dated 5-6-2002 of the 1st respondent and the proceedings rc. No. E. 1/45037/2001, dated 7-6-2002 of the 3rd respondent, and pass such other further order or orders as this hon ble Tribunal may deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the case. " ( 2 ) THE validity of G. O. Ms. No. 1019, Revenue (Endowments-I) department dated 5-6-2002 of the 1st respondent and the proceedings rc. No. E. 1/45037/2001, dated 7-6-2002 of the 3rd respondent, and pass such other further order or orders as this hon ble Tribunal may deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the case. " ( 2 ) THE validity of G. O. Ms. No. 245, revenue (Endowments-I) Department dated 8-5-2002 issued by the Government of andhra Pradesh has been assailed insofar as it relates to providing a channel by method of transfer by deputation of Revenue personnel in the posts included in categories 3 and 4 of the A. P. Charitable and hindu Religious Institutions and endowments Service Rules, 2002 by contending that the rule is hit by vice of arbitrariness, irrationality and violative of art. 14 of the Constitution of India. ( 3 ) BY the impugned amended rule, the post of Regional Joint Commissioner, including Joint Commissioner, could be filled by two modes, viz. , (i) by promotion from category of Deputy Commissioner (Category 4 of Class-I), and (ii) by transfer of an I. A. S. , officer/special Grade Deputy collector on deputation. Since the constitutional validity of the rule is seized by the learned Tribunal, it is not appropriate on the part of this Court, at this stage, to express any opinion on several submissions made by Sri S. Ramachander Rao, learned SFenior counsel appearing for the petitioners touching the validity of the rule. At this juncture, suffice it to state that, as quite often held and reiterated by the constitutional courts the presumption of constitutionality is attached to the statute as well An the rule- framed under the statute. Unless, after final hearing, the statute or the rule, as the case may be, is struck down as offending Part III of the Constitution or any other provisions of the Constitution as ultra vires the parent statute, the statutory rule should normally be given effect. Of course, what was sought by the petitioners by way of interim relief was the suspension of the impugned government Order and not the kind of interim order now granted by the learned tribunal. We have perused the order of the learned Tribunal. Having admitted the original Application, it has issued notices to the respondents. In that view of the matter, we do not think it appropriate to suspend the impugned rule at this stage. We have perused the order of the learned Tribunal. Having admitted the original Application, it has issued notices to the respondents. In that view of the matter, we do not think it appropriate to suspend the impugned rule at this stage. However, we find that there is urgency to hear and dispose of the Original Application out of turn. We, therefore, direct the learned tribunal to hear and dispose of O. A. No. 5496 of 2002 and other connected original Applications, if any, out of turn and preferably within a period of two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. We further direct that any appointment that may be made in the interregnum to the post of Regional Joint commissioner, including Joint commissioner, shall be subject to the final result of the Original Application, This position shall be made clear to the promotees in the promotion orders. ( 4 ) BEFORE parting with this case, a submission made by Sri S. Ramachander rao, needs to be noticed. Sri S. Ramachander rao told us that though the amended impugned rule provides for appointment to the post of Regional Joint Commissioner, including Joint Commissioner, by way of promotion from the feeder channel also, but in practice no post of Regional Joint commissioner is being filled by way of promotion as if the amended rule does not permit the State Government to do so. Suffice it to state that even under the amended rule, the post of Regional Joint commissioner, including Joint commissioner, could be filled by promotion also and there is no bar for the State government not to fill up those posts by way of promotion. ( 5 ) WITH the above directions, the writ petition shall stand disposed of with no order as to costs.