ORDER

1. The validity of Rule 25 of the Rajasthan Administrative Service (Emergency Recruitment) Rules, 1976 is the subject-matter of challenge in this appeal. By the impugned judgment the High Court has held that particular Rule to be intra vires relying upon the judgment of this Court in a Anand Prakash Saksena v. Union of IndiaI but in Saksena easel Rules 25(3)(1) and 25(3)(2) were not the subject-matter of challenge. It also further appears that in K.P. Singh l v. State of Rajasthan2 where Rules 32(3) and 28-B(5) were the subject-matter for consideration in order to have the computation of service, the Court did examine Rule 25 of the Rajasthan Administrative Service (Emergency Recruitment) Rules, 1976 and came to the conclusion that the notional service could be taken into account as a part of service. It is true as contended by Mr Jain, the validity of Rules 25(3)(1) and 25(3)(2) was not the subject-matter of challenge but in the event the Rule under challenge is struck down, it will be in direct conflict with the pronouncement of this Court in K.P. Singhal Case2. In these circumstances, we think it appropriate to refer this matter to a three-Judge Bench.

2. Application for