ORDER 1. Leave granted. The appellants were appointed on various dates between 1988 to 1992 on an ad hoc basis temporarily in the Frozen Semen Bank Project. Although the initial period of appointment was six months, the appellants' services were continued from time to time. Ultimately, their services were terminated in 1998. Some employees similarly situated as the appellants approached the High Court at Ranchi asking for protection of their appointments. They were unsuccessful. The matter came up before this Court under Article 136 of the Constitution. 2. The Court disposed of the matter by its order dated 23-7-2003 by issuing certain directions. The Court noted that the ad hoc appointees had no right to claim regularisation of services. However, having regard to the fact that they had been appointed in 1988-1989 and had continued to work in the posts for years together, the Court directed the respondent State to constitute a Selection Committee as per the existing rules within a period of three months. The appellants in that case whose services had been terminated were directed to apply to the Secretary of the Animal Husbandry within a period of one month for being reappointed or for regularisation of their services. The Committee was directed to consider the eligibility, suitability, past record as well as the educational qualifications of the appellants in accordance with the relevant rules applicable as on the date of the order. The Committee was also to give relaxation of age and weightage over outsiders. However, if any candidate was found unsuitable for some reason, it would be open to the Committee to reject his application. The appropriate authority was directed to issue orders for appointment after considering the roster and the merit list on available vacancies. 3. The appel1ants before us had approached the High Court at Ranchi. They placed the aforesaid order of this Court dated 23-7-2003 before the High Court and prayed that similar relief may be granted to them. The High Court did not do so in view of the last paragraph in the order dated 23-7-2003 to the effect "that the case shall not be treated as precedent• as we have decided it purely on the facts and in the peculiar circumstances of this case". 4. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondents has submitted that there were very few vacancies against which any further appointments could be made. 4. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondents has submitted that there were very few vacancies against which any further appointments could be made. It was further pointed out that there were a number of posts which had been illegally filled by the Regional Director and the number of such appointees exceeded the requirement of the Department. It was also stated that pursuant to the earlier order dated 23-7-2003 due to a direction of this Court, Selection Committee had been set up and some candidates had already been appointed. The learned counsel also submits that they had no objection to grant similar relief to other such appointees but that this should not be repeated so as to debar the claim of other persons who might be d appointed directly against the vacancies in the respondent Department. 5. We are of the view that the issue should be resolved finally and should not be kept pending. The earlier order of this Court was passed on 23-7-2003. The right to be selected thereunder cannot continue indefinitely. Therefore, we direct that: (1) The respondent Authority shall advertise in the local newspapers having wide circulation of the holding of selections for the purpose of filling of those vacancies which, according to the rules, are to be fil1ed by direct appointment. (2) Applications should be asked for from those ad hoc employees who were appointed in the Frozen Semen Bank Project between 1988 to 1992 and whose services were terminated in 1998. No such employee who has already been considered by the Selection Committee under the order dated 23-7-2003 shall apply. (3) No appointment already made either in the normal course or pursuant to the earlier order of this Court shall be disturbed. (4) The advertisement shall specify the last date within which the candidate concerned shall apply for consideration including thereon proof that the candidate had served with the respondents. (5) The selection shall be made by the Selection Committee only against the available vacancies. Preference shall be given to those who have longer tenure of service over those who have shorter tenure of service, other things being equal. (6) All other conditions in the order dated 23-7-2003 shall be operative as far as the procedure to be followed by the Selection a Committee to be set up pursuant to this order is concerned. (7) This shall be a one-time exercise. (6) All other conditions in the order dated 23-7-2003 shall be operative as far as the procedure to be followed by the Selection a Committee to be set up pursuant to this order is concerned. (7) This shall be a one-time exercise. No further application shall be entertained by such ad hoc employees. This fact should also .be mentioned in the advertisement. 6. The appeals are disposed of.