This petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India is directed against an advertisement dated 06-12-2016, by which, the respondent No.3 has initiated the recruitment proceedings for appointment to the post of Field Assistant and Accountant (Class III). The petitioners, two in number, are working as Clerk-cum-Cashier in the services of the Federation and are presently posted at Mahasamund. The petitioners claim was that they are working in the Federation for the last 15 years on temporary basis and presently, they are also member of the Provident Fund Scheme. Case of the petitioners is that in the past, taking into consideration that number of temporary/dailywage employees have been working in the Federation for several years, the service rules were framed providing weightage for work experience. Referring to relevant rules mentioned in Rule 11(e) of the Service Rules, it is submitted that these rules provided weightage of 20 marks of work experience in service as temporary/dailywage basis, so that, they would compete with the candidates from the open market in the matter of direct recruitment. According to petitioners, these service rules were proposed under the resolution passed by the Federation and duly approved by the Registrar, Co-operative Societies. Under the new set up, approved in the year 2007, the post of Field Officer, Accountant (Class III) was to be filled up by way of direct recruitment. Vide resolution dated 16-02-2013, the Board of Directors amended Rule 11(e) and the provision for grant of weightage marks for experience, was added. Those amendments have already been subjected to challenge. The Board of Directors passed a resolution on 01-08-2015, proposing amendment in Rule 11(a), (b), (c) & (d), which related to maximum age, reservation and applicability of other conditions in the matter of recruitment. Further averment is that while proposing amendment in aforesaid clauses of Rule 11, as referred to above, the Board of Directors did not propose any amendment in the existing Rule 11(e) of the relevant service rule, which provided for grant of weightage marks for the work experience. However, when the resolution was sent to the Registrar for approval of the service rules, the Registrar, while granting his approval, amended Rule 11, on his own consideration, which was communicated vide order dated 05-08-2015 (Annexure P/15). The petitioners grievance arose at this stage when the Registrar substituted new Rule 11 in place of pre-existing provisions in Rule 11, which is completely different from the scheme of award of weightage marks for experience gained while working as temporary/dailywage employee. This was followed by impugned advertisement, inviting applications for appointment to the post of Field Assistant & Accountant. As the rule no longer provides for grant of weightage marks for work experience, the advertisement also does not provide for any such weightage. It is the aforesaid amendment in Rule 11, vide order dated 05-08-2015 and the impugned advertisement dated 06-12-2016, which is under challenge.

2. Contention of learned counsel for the petitioners is that the order of the Registrar dated 05-08-2015, incorporating the newly amended Rule 11 is in excess of power, arbitrary, illegal and is abuse of the its authority to determine the terms and conditions of employees of the Co-operative Society. The petitioners have worked in the Federation since long. If the weightage of experience is not given, the petitioners may not be able to compete with the candidates from open market. According to learned counsel for the petitioners, the proposal for amendment in the existing service rules having been sent to the Registrar, the Registrar could either approve or disapprove the same, but could not have amended the rule of its own. The submission is that the Board of Directors proposed amendment only in Clause(a) to (d) of Rule 11 of the Service Rules. Therefore, the Registrar could either approv