IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.1583 of 2010 UMESH PASWAN Versus THE STATE OF BIHAR & ORS ----------- 2. 03.02.2010 Heard learned Counsel for the petitioner and the learned Counsel for the State. The petitioner was appointed as Panchayat Secretary, Deodaha Gram Kutchery, on 29.9.2007 when he has been terminated on 8.12.2007 by a non speaking order. Learned Counsel submits that the controversy originates in context of the issue that Madhyama was equivalent to Matriculation for such appointment. The petitioner came to be appointed on his qualification of Matriculation. There is no allegation of any illegality in his application. This Court has already held in CWJC No. 16312 of 2009 and CWJC No. 6762 of 2009 that rules regulating appointment have been amended on 5.1.2009 with effect from 31.1.2008 accepting the Madhyama qualification as equivalent to Matriculation for purposes of appointment. That this amendment cannot be given retrospective effect beyond the legislative amendment by executive instruction. The petitioner having been appointed much prior to the same his services cannot be interferrred with. If this Court has decided an issue which has a bearing on the case of the petitioner the respondents are obliged to consider the impugned order of termination in that light and pass fresh reasoned and speaking order in accordance with law. The impugned order dated 8.12.2007 is set aside and the matter remanded to the respondents to pass such fresh order in accordance with law within a maximum period of six weeks from the date of receipt and/or production of a copy of this order, if that be the only issue involved. The writ application stands disposed. Snkumar/- (Navin Sinha,J.)