ORDER 1. This appeal is directed against the judgment and order dated 24th February, 2004, passed by the learned Single Judge in W.P. (S) No. 511/2004, whereby the writ application was allowed and the advertisement dated 29th December, 2002, which was Annexure-4 to the writ application, as also the examination conducted on the basis thereof on 17th January, 2003, was quashed. Inasmuch as, the present appellants were not parties to the writ application, leave was granted to them by order dated 17th March, 2005, to prefer the instant appeal. 2. The subject-matter of the writ application was the aforesaid advertisement dated 29th December, 2002 and a subsequent advertisement dated 20th December, 2003. In the writ application, a direction was sought upon the respondents not to make any appointment to the post of Assistant in the Jharkhand Vidhan Sabha Secretariat, Ranchi, in keeping with the advertisement issued by the In-charge Secretary of the Jharkhand Vidhan Sabha, Ranchi, on 29th December, 2002 and to strictly follow the provisions of the subsequent advertisement dated 20th December, 2003. 3. It appears that the Jharkhand Vidhan Sabha Secretariat (Recruitment and Condition of Service) Rules, 2003 was published on 10th March, 2003, making provision for Constitution of an Appointment Committee for the purpose of recruitment of staff in the Jharkhand Vidhan Sabha Secretariat. On 20th December, 2003, for appointment to the aforesaid post, advertisement was issued by the Speaker of the Vidhan Sabha and the last date for submission of applications for the post of Assistant was 3rd January, 2003. The grievance of the writ petitioners was that despite the aforesaid process, an attempt was being made to take steps for back door appointment of 52 candidates, who had been called for a written test and in respect whereof, a written examination was held on 17th January, 2004. According to the writ petitioners, the said 52 candidates, who had been called for the writ examination, had also been appointed by the then Speaker of the Bihar Vidhan Sabha, but their appointments were challenged in the Patna High Court in CWJC No. 7995/1990 and all the appointments of the Assistants numbering 285 persons were declared illegal and quashed. The said order was affirmed by the Honble Supreme Court and thereafter the Bihar Vidhan Sabha Secretariat issued an order on 10th December, 1996, terminating the services of the said employees. The said order was affirmed by the Honble Supreme Court and thereafter the Bihar Vidhan Sabha Secretariat issued an order on 10th December, 1996, terminating the services of the said employees. In the writ application, it was alleged that 52 of the dismissed employees had been issued admit cards by the Speaker of the Jharkhand Vidhan Sabha for appearance in the written test. 4. On behalf of the Jharkhand Vidhan Sabha, it had been contended before the learned Single Judge that the first advertisement dated 29th December, 2002, had been issued only with the intention of making certain temporary appointments since the Assembly was facing difficulty in its functioning on account of shortage of staff. However, having regard to the fact that in the said advertisement, a provision had been made that only the candidates having three years experience would be eligible to apply, except the aforesaid 52 candidates, all the applicants who had applied were found ineligible. In other words, the said provision was included in the advertisement so as to favour the 52 candidates, who had been appointed in the erstwhile Assembly of Bihar. On consideration of the said set of facts, the learned Single Judge was of the view that the calling of only those 52 candidates on the basis of the advertisement dated 29th December, 2002, for the written examination was wholly illegal and held that the said advertisement could not and should not be given effect to and no appointment should be made pursuant to the said advertisement. The learned Single Judge thereafter referred to the fresh advertisement, which had been published on 20th December, 2003, for which the last date for submission of applications was 3rd January, 2004. It was also recorded by the learned Single Judge that no date had been fixed by the respondents for holding the written examination pursuant to the fresh advertisement. The learned Single Judge thereafter referred to the fresh advertisement, which had been published on 20th December, 2003, for which the last date for submission of applications was 3rd January, 2004. It was also recorded by the learned Single Judge that no date had been fixed by the respondents for holding the written examination pursuant to the fresh advertisement. Accordingly, in order to meet the ends of justice and to avoid any injustice to the candidates, who had also applied pursuant to the advertisement dated 29th December, 2002, the learned Single Judge directed that the respondents No. 3 and 4 should hold a written examination of the candidates, who had applied against the earlier advertisement dated 29th December, 2002 and also under the fresh advertisement dated 20th December, 2003 and thereafter, the respondents were directed to proceed strictly in accordance with the Rules and Procedures for Appointment for the purpose of selecting suitable candidates for appointment without giving any undue preference to any of the candidates. 5. Aggrieved by the said decision, the appellants before us, who are some of the 52 candidates, have filed the instant appeal pursuant to the leave granted. 6. Appearing on behalf of the appellants, Mr. Rajiv Ranjan, learned Advocate, submitted that it was always open to the authorities to prescribed rules and regulations for the purpose of recruitment and in the instant case, the stipulation that candidates must have three years experience was not unconstitutional and the learned Single Judge was not, therefore, justified in quashing the advertisement dated 29th December, 2002 as also the examination held on the basis thereof. 7. Mr. Rajiv Ranjan also contended that no favouritism having been shown to the appellants, even if the order of the learned Single Judge is to be given effect to, the results of the examination already undertaken by the appellants should be taken into consideration without the authorities insisting that they too should sit for the fresh examination. 8. On the other hand, Mr. 8. On the other hand, Mr. Anwar, learned Senior Advocate, who had appeared for the writ petitioner, urged that the learned Single Judge had correctly assessed the situation, since the stipulation regarding experience of three years in the first advertisement had been motivatedly introduced to favour those candidates who had earlier been appointed by the Speaker of the Bihar Vidhan Sabha, since after the formation of the State of Jharkhand there would be very few candidates available in Jharkhand with the experience of three years to be eligible for appearing in the written examination under the first advertisement. Mr. Anwar submitted that in order to avoid any prejudice and injustice to any of the candidates under the Recruitment Rules, which have now been framed by the Jharkhand Vidhan Sabha Secretariat, the direction given by the learned Single Judge should be allowed to stand. 9. Mr. Jerath, who had appeared for the Assembly, had initially reiterated the stand taken before the learned Single Judge on the ground that there was dearth of employees in the Secretariat and the Speaker should be allowed to make some arrangement at least of a temporary nature so that the functioning of the Assembly was not disturbed. However, Mr. Jerath ultimately submitted that although, under the Bihar Vidhan Sabha Recruitment Rules, there was a provision for some sort of temporary arrangement, under the Jharkhand Vidhan Sabha Recruitment Rules, such power has possibly not been included. 10. Having considered the submissions made on behalf of the respective parties, we are of the view that the order passed by the learned Single Judge does not need any interference and modification, except to the extent that those persons, who are found to be eligible in terms of the existing Recruitment Rules of the Jharkhand Vidhan Sabha, will be entitled to appear for the examination to be conducted in terms of the advertisement dated 20th December, 2003, We reiterate that those candidates, who had also applied in terms of the advertisement dated 29th December, 2002, will also be considered for the examination, if they are found eligible under the existing Rules. 11. We do not make any observation with regard to the Speakers power to make any temporary appointment and if the Rules so provides, the Assembly will be free to take steps for such appointment in accordance with law. With the aforesaid directions, this appeal is disposed of. 11. We do not make any observation with regard to the Speakers power to make any temporary appointment and if the Rules so provides, the Assembly will be free to take steps for such appointment in accordance with law. With the aforesaid directions, this appeal is disposed of. There will be no order as to costs.