IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA LPA No.231 of 2009 Shakila Khatoon w/o late Gaushal Alam Naimee, r/o mohalla – Aliganj, P.S. Chandauti, District - Gaya Versus 1. The State Of Bihar through the Secretary, Primary and Middle School, Bihar, Patna. 2. The Director, , Primary and Middle School, Bihar, Patna. 3. The Distric Collector, Gaya 4. The District Superintendent of Education, Gaya 5. Md. Abdul Wali Karimi, Secretary, Kashmi Middle School, Gaya 6. Md. S.M. Kamaluddin, Headmaster, Kashmi Middle School, Gaya ----------- For the appellant: Mr. Pramod Kumar Sinha Mr. Arvind Kumar Sharma, Advocates For the respondents: Mr. N.K.Sinha, AAG - X 5 3/7/2009 Heard learned counsel for the appellant and learned counsel for the State. We find no error of law or fact in the judgment under appeal by the writ court. Annexure – 14, on which learned counsel for the appellant is placing strong reliance, is a circular letter issued on 1st July, 2006 to the effect that in special circumstances while considering compassionate appointment to the dependants of a deceased teacher, the requirement of training may be relaxed if other educational qualifications are fulfilled but even in such case the appointee should be trained within five years. 2 In the case of this appeal, the necessity of seeking compassionate appointment arose long back on 27.4.1998 as appellant’s husband died in harness on the post of Assistant Teacher in a Government Aided Minority Middle School, Gaya. Even after disposal of her earlier writ petition on 26.7.2004, the authorities did not approve appointment of the appellant on compassionate ground because as per the policy decision and rules then existing she could not be appointed as a teacher even on compassion in absence of required training. Now a subsequent policy decision dated 1.7.2006 cannot be made a basis to re-open the earlier decision of the authorities specially when the matter relates to compassionate appointment and long number of years have passed since the death of the appellant’s husband. We have also noticed that the policy decision contained in Annexure – 14 dated 1.7.2006 was not even brought to the notice of the writ court. In the facts of the case, we find no merit in this appeal and it is dismissed. Neyaz/ ( Shiva Kirti Singh, ACJ.) (Anjana Prakash, J.) 3