V. Ramasubramanian, J.

1. Challenging an amendment to the Regulations of the Telangana State Power Generation Corporation by which one of the modes of recruitment viz., Recruitment by Transfer to the post of Chemist was deleted, the respondents in these writ appeals, filed a batch of writ petitions. By a final order dated 22-08-2016, a learned Judge of this Court allowed the writ petitions in part, by rejecting the challenge to the amendment, but by holding that the vacancies that arose before the impugned amendment to the Regulations, should be filled up only with reference to the unamended Regulations in force at the time when the vacancies arose. Aggrieved by the said order, the Telangana State Power Generation Corporation has come up with the present writ appeals.

2. Heard Mr. G.Vidyasagar, learned Senior Counsel appearing for the appellants, Mr. C.V. Mohan Reddy, learned Senior Counsel and Mr. J.Sudheer, learned counsel appearing for the respondents.

3. The facts on which there are no disputes are as follows:

(a) In exercise of the powers conferred by the relevant provisions of the Electricity Supply Act, 1948, the Andhra Pradesh State Electricity Board had issued a set of Regulations known as Andhra Pradesh State Electricity Board Service Regulations. Under the original Regulations issued way back on 02.02.1970, two methods of recruitment viz., direct recruitment; and recruitment by transfer were prescribed for appointment to the post of Chemist. But by an amendment issued under BPMs.No.253, dated 28.08.1990, the Board deleted the provision for recruitment by transfer.

(b) However, by another amendment under G.O.Ms.No.73, dated 17-05-2008, the Board reintroduced the method of recruitment by transfer once again.

(c) The respondents were appointed in the Telangana State Power Generation Corporation as Junior Plant attendants. They claim that they were qualified for recruitment by transfer to the post of Chemist, as per the amended Regulations introduced with effect from 17.05.2008.

(d) By a circular memo dated 30.09.2015, the Chief General Manager of the Corporation appears to have sought particulars of candidates who were willing to be considered for recruitment by transfer to the post of Chemist. The respondents appear to have expressed willingness;

(e) But, it appears that the Board took a decision on 03.11.2015 to fill up the vacancies only through direct recruitment. However, without reference to the Board’s decision, the particulars of the candidates were collected on 09.11.2015 and a list of candidates eligible for recruitment by transfer was forwarded by the Chief Engineer on 21.01.2015.

(f) However, the process of recruitment by transfer was not completed for nearly 6 months. While so, the Board passed a resolution on 16.05.2016, to dispense with the method of recruitment by transfer. Accordingly, an amendment was issued to the Service Regulations under T.G.O.O.No.63, dated 16.05.2015 deleting the method of appointment by transfer from the service Regulations, in so far as the post of Chemist is concerned.

(g) After the amendment of the Regulations, the Corporation issued a notification dated 23.05.2016 inviting applications for direct recruitment to the post of Chemist. Immediately, the respondents approached this Court by way of writ petitions, challenging the very validity of the amended regulations. The learned Judge found no merit in the challenge to the amendments and hence, he upheld the validity of the same. However, the learned Judge granted relief to the respondents following the decisions of the Supreme Court right from Y.V. Rangaiah v. J. Sreenivasa Rao, (1983) 3 SCC 284, which took a view that the vacancies arising at a particular point of time may have to be filled up only with reference to the rules existing as on the date of arising of the vacancies. Aggrieved by the said order