I.A. Ansari, J.

1. (i) Do the rules for transaction of business, framed under Article 166(3) of the Constitution of India, need to be followed and, if not followed, whether a decision would be illegal?

(ii) Whether the Rules of Executive Business, framed under Article 166(3), in the State of Arunachal Pradesh, permit any change in the conditions of service, or in the method of recruitment to a service or post, to which the appointment is made by the Governor, and if such change or alteration is in violation of the Rules of Executive Business, whether such change or alteration is sustainable in law?

Broadly speaking, these are the two important questions of paramount importance, which the present writ petition has raised.

The material facts, giving rise to the present writ petition, may, in brief, be set out as under:

(i) The petitioner No. 1 herein was initially appointed, on 14.11.1984, as Upper Division Clerk (in short, 'UDC') in the Civil Secretariat, Arunachal Pradesh. Similarly, petitioner No. 2 was also initially appointed, on 21.08.1990, as UDC in the said Secretariat. The petitioner No. 1 and petitioner No. 2 were promoted to the post of Assistants in the year 1992 and 1