JUDGMENT

P. C. NAIK, J. — The petitioner, who is serving under the opp. party as an Assistant Law Officer, has approached this Court for issuance of an appropriate writ, direction or order commanding the opp. party “to create higher post i.e. Law Officer in the Legal branch of the Corporation and throw open the chances of promotion to the petitioner and pass such other order/orders as the ends of justice requires.”

2. The facts involved in this case are simple.

Admittedly, the petitioner is a Law Graduate. On being sponsored by the State Employment Exchange, Bhubaneswar for the post of Legal Assistant, he was duly selected and appointed as such under the opposite party vide appointment order issued to him on 11.8.1986 which post he joined the same day. It is averred by the petitioner that the Government in various Departments had in December, 1988 redesignated the post of Legal Assistant as Assistant Law Officer carrying the same status and scale of pay. Subsequent thereto, the Corporation also redesignated the post of Legal Assistant under it as Assistant Law Officer without any change of status and pay scale and consequently, the petitioner was designated as the Assistant Law Officer under the Corpora¬tion. It is further averred by the petitioner, that at its 53rd meeting held on 29.6.1973 the Board of Directors of the Corpora¬tion (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Board’) had resolved that “the Government rules be adopted by the Corporation where Corpo¬ration had no rules of its own” which was reiterated at a subse¬quent meeting held on 13.10.1976. It is the case of the petition¬er that in view of the said resolution, the employees of the Corporation for whom no specific rule had been made by the Corpo¬ration, would be governed by the rules which are applicable to the State Government employees. According to the petitioner, since a post of Law Officer, Under Secretary (Law), Deputy Secre¬tary (Legal), Joint Secretary (Legal), have been provided for in the Secretariat by virtue of the Orissa Secretariat Legal Serv¬ice Recruitment Rules, 1977 and since he has put in more than five years of service as a Legal Assistant/Assistant Law Officer, the opp. party should likewise create a post of Law Officer to which post he may have an opportunity of being promoted or else, his zeal to work will be adversely affected on account of stagnation for want of promotional opportunity. It is averred that time and again the petitioner had submitted representations to the opp. party setting forth his case, but as the same have gone unheeded, he has been compelled to approach this Court by way of this writ application for appropriate relief.

3. According to the opp. party, the claim of the petitioner is misconceived for it is not for him to demand creation of a higher post so that he could hold it. However, it is not disputed that at the 53rd meeting of the Board, a resolution was passed whereby it was resolved that in the absence of any rules the employees of the Corporation will be governed by the rules applicable to State Government employees. It is however stated by the opp. party that the said resolution itself called upon the Board to suggest specific rules for Corporation employees where no rule existed and these draft rules were to be placed before the Board for its approval. Accordingly, the draft service rules were prepared which were duly approved and came to be known as “The Orissa Forest Corporation Service Rules, 1986”. Rule 3 of the said rules provides that “all previous rules, orders, circu¬lars issued by the Management regarding conditions of employment and service of the workmen/employees are superseded by these ‘Rules’ to the extent of their repugnance to these ‘Rules’.” The aforesaid Rules, according to the opp. party, deal with matters relating to the general conditions of service including mode of recruitment, promotion, deputation, pay and allowances, conduct and disciplinary proceedings. Thus, it is submitted that as spe