1 hvn IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 4685 OF 2010 Ajay Pandhari Bramhankar and Ors. ... Petitioner Versus The Controller Legal Metrology and Ors. ... Respondents Mr. U.P. Warunjikar for Petitioner. Mr. V.S. Gokhale for R. Nos. 1, 2 and 3. CORAM : D.K. DESHMUKH & N.D. DESHPANDE,JJ. DATED : SEPTEMBER 08, 2010. P.C. By this petition, Petitioner challenges the order passed by the Maharashtra Administrative Tribunal in Original Application No. 1244 of 2009 dated 19.3.2010. That application was filed by the Petitioner challenging the advertisement issued by the Government for the recruitment of post of Assistant Superintendent. The challenge was that as the Rule regulating recruitment to that post were not finalized and were at the stage of draft Rules. the advertisement could not have been issued. Maharashtra Administrative Tribunal relying on two judgments of the Supreme Court has held that if there is urgency of recruitment, it can be made on the basis of draft Rules. We have heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner. He submits that the recruitment on the basis of draft Rules cannot be made. He submits that as 2 and when the Rules are finalized, if it is found that there are provisions under the final Rules which are contrary to the draft Rules, there will be difficult situation. The learned counsel further submits that though the draft rules are published in the year 1996, they are not yet finalized. Therefore the Maharashtra Administrative Tribunal should have issued directions to the Government for finalization of recruitment Rules. There is definite authority for the proposition that if the recruitment is required to be made on urgent basis, it can be made on the basis of the draft rules treating the draft rules as executive instructions which the Government is competent to issue under Article 162 of the Constitution. If the recruitment is urgently required, it can be made even on the basis of provisional seniority list without waiting for finalization of seniority list. In our opinion, therefore, Maharashtra Administrative Tribunal has not committed any error in recording a finding that there is no fault in issuance of the advertisement on the basis of draft Rules when the final rules have not been framed. So far as issuing direction to the Government for finalization of the rules is concerned, the law is settled that no mandamus can be issued to Legislature. The Rules are framed under Article 309 of the Constitution which is a rule making power of the Government which is legislative in character and therefore, there was no question of issuing any direction to the rule making authority. We do not find any substance in the Petition. Petition disposed of. (N.D. DESHPANDE,J.) (D.K. DESHMUKH,J.)