The State Government has the authority to take policy decisions to meet the exigency of administration, provided they do not contravene any provision of the Constitution or statutory provisions enacted by the Legislature.

YADAV, J.

( 1 ) BY filing the present writ petition, the petitioners Union questions the legality and constitutional validity of Ordinance dated 10-2-2000 promulgated by His Excellency the Government of Rajasthan in exercise of powers conferred under clause (1) of Article 213 of the Constitution, a copy whereof is filed and marked as Annexure-2 to the writ petition on the ground inter alia that said Ordinance is ultra vires to the provisions of the Constitution and scheme of the Rajasthan Secondary Eduction Act,1957.

( 2 ) THE brief facts necessary for disposal of the instant writ petition are that the Rajasthan Secondary Education Act, 1957 (hereinafter referred to "act No. 42 of 1957") was enacted by State Legislature for developing system of Secondary Education and also to establish a Board to reorganise, regulate and supervise secondary education in State of Rajasthan.

( 3 ) SECTION 3 of the Act No. 42 of 1957 empowers for constitution of the Board. Under S. 4 of the aforesaid Act the composition of Board has been provided. S. 5 of the said Act contains the provisions to the effect that the Board shall have its headquarter at a place to be notified by the State Government in the official Gazette. It is pertinent to mention here that a proviso has been added to S. 5 of Act No. 42 of 1957 by impugned Ordinance Annexure-2 to the writ petition which is reproduced hereinbelow :-"provided that the Board may establish Divisional offices and District level offices for performing such of its functions as it may consider appropriate but the Board shall do so only with the prior permission of the State Government and the decision to establish such offices as well as functions to be carried out there, shall be notified in the official Gazette". In pursuant to aforesaid Ordinance dated 10-2-2000, a notification on 16-2-2000 has been issued, a copy whereof is filed and marked as Annexure-R/1 to the return filed by the respondent Nos. 1 and 2.

( 4 ) IN the present writ petition, caveat were lodged on behalf of respondents who have filed return to the writ petition denying the averments made therein. Respondent Nos. 1 and 2 have filed a joint return whereas respondent No. 3 has filed a separate reply to the writ petition. Respondent Nos. 1 and 2 in their return specifically averred that the Ordinance No. 2 of 2000 amending Sec. 5 of Act No. 42 of 1957 is not at all inconsistent to the provisions of Sec. 5 of the said Act. The headquarter of Secondary Board is still at Ajmer and its Divisional offices and District level offices are required to be established in public interest to facilitate effective functioning of the Board under the proviso added to Sec. 5 of Act No. 42 of 1957. The Divisional and District level offices have already been established as per Gazette Notification dated 16-2-2000. The Divisional centres have been established at Udaipur, Jodhpur City : Rural (Jaipur Division), Bikaner and Kota. It is averred that these centres will perform various functions and duties as specified in the said notification issued on 16-2-2000. It is averred that expenses in maintaining Divisional headquarters and District headquarters are not likely to increase to the extent as mentioned by the petitioner inasmuch as the present staff working in the Board will be adjusted on these Divisional offices and District level offices. It is further averred in the reply filed by respondent Nos. 1 and 2 that even if there is slight increase in the expenses that too looking into the public interest and the facilities provided to the students, the increase in expenditure would be immaterial. It is averred that Divisional offices, contact offices are established as integral part and parcel of Board established at Ajmer. Therefore, if it is considered administratively feasible, then the employees of the Board can be transferred to Divisional offices or District level offices.

( 5 ) THE respondent Nos. 1 and 2 further averred in the reply that b