JUDGMENT : N. Paul Vasantha Kumar, J. 1. This writ appeal is filed against the order made in W.P. No.1890 of 2011 dated 05.07.2012, wherein the learned single Judge has issued a writ of declaration declaring G.O. Ms, No. 255 Tamil Development and Religious Endowment and Information (RE 4-2) Department dated 28.06.2010 as null and void and directed the appellants to consider the grievances of the officers/servants employed in non-senior grade temples and make necessary provisions in the Rules for enabling them at least to get appointment by any one of the methods of recruitment and the appellants were directed to consider the said matter and pass orders afresh within a period of eight weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of the order. Heard Mr. A.L. Somayaji, learned Advocate General appearing for the appellants and Mr. G. Thilagavathi, learned council appearing for the respondents 1 to 3. 2. The grievance of the writ petitioners/respondents 1 to 3 before the learned single judge was that though a specific direction was issued by the Division Bench of this Court in W.A. Nos. 1497 and 1561 of 2005 and 968 of 2006 by common order dated 22.01.2009, directing the first appellant to frame comprehensive service rules for selection appointment, filling up of posts, seniority, promotion etc. in various grades of temples in consultation with commercial Taxes and Religious endowments department and Personnel and Administrative Reforms Department by considering the circular issued by the commissioner of H.R. & C.E. Department dated 04.08.1995, within a period of six months and till then, no appointments are to be made except in case of emergency, contrary to the said direction, the impugned order was issued even though the draft Rules contain the provisions for selection, appointment and filling up of posts, seniority and promotion etc., of various grades of temples. 3. The learned single Judge allowed writ petition only on the said limited ground and remitted the matter, however, while remanding the matter, the learned Judge has given a positive direction to make provisions in the Rules for enabling the officers and servants employed in non- senior grade temples at least to get appointment in senior grade temples by any one of the methods of recruitment. The said portion of the order is challenged by the appellants and the learned Advocate General contended that the rule making authority is competent to frame rules and the circular issued by the commissioner is only a recommendation and it has no binding effect on the Government. Therefore, the direction issued by the learned single judge may be modified and matter may be remitted to the Government to consider it afresh. 4. The order of the Division Bench in W.A. Nos. 1497 and 1561 of 2005 dated 22.01.2009 which the learned single judge relied on, gave direction positively to the Government to frame comprehensive rules keeping in mind the circular dated 04.08.1995. The said circular has not been borne in mind while issuing the Government Order in G.O. Ms. No. 255 Tamil Development and Religious Endowment and Information (RE 4-2) Department dated 28.06.2010. The learned single Judge was therefore right in setting aside the said Government Order. However, the learned single Judge was not right in giving positive direction while ordering to reconsider and pass fresh orders. In such view of the matter, we dispose of the writ appeal by clarifying the direction issued by the learned single judge in para 32 of the order, holding that the Government may consider the claim of the officers and servants employed in non senior grade temples for the purpose of appointment in senior grade temples by any one of the methods of recruitment which was the direction given by the Division Bench in the judgment stated supra. The said exercise is directed to be completed by the Government within a period of four months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. Till new rules are framed as directed above, the appellants are permitted to make appointments only in case of emergency and if such appointments are to be made, the claim of the members of the first respondent Association shall also be considered. No costs.