HIGHCOITRTOFCHHATTISGARHATBILASPUR WritPetifionNo.S7of28{B > PETITIONER Narendra Kumar Slirivastava age about 43 years, son of Late Shri R.P. Shrivastava, R/'o Fost Basna, District Mahasamimd, C.g. Posted as Assistant Teacher, at MiddSe Schooi, Gersa Distt. Raigarh (CG). VERSUS . RE.SPONDENTS 1. State ofChhattisgarh through the Secretary, Department of Education Public Instnictions, Govt. of CBhattisgarh, Mantralaya, RaipurCG. 2. The Director of Public lustniction Govt of Chhattisgarh, Mantralaya, RaipurC.G. 3. The District Education Qfficer, Raigarh District Raigarh C.G. (WMT PETTHON UNDER ARTICLE 226/227 OF THE CONSTTTUTION OF INDIA) (SB: Hon'Me Mr. Safish K. Agnihotri, J.) Present : Smt.Hamida Siddique,Advocateforthepetitioner. Shri U.N.S. Deo, Govt. Advocaie forthe State. ORALORDER (Passed on 28"' ofMardi, 2008) With the congent ofthe pa-rties, the matter is taken up for hearuig finally. The petitioner was appointed as Assistaiit Teacher vide order dated 01.03.95 iii accordance with the circular dated 10.06.94 (See 18.06.94) (Aimexure R/l). Accordiiigly the petitioner who happens to he the son-in-law ofthe widow oftlie deceased emptoyee, namely, Shri A.K. Shrivastava, was given compassionate appomtment. Subsequently, vide order dated 28,07.98 (Annexure P/2), tbe appointment of the petitioner was cancelled in view of tlie circular dated 10.09.95. The circiilar dated 10.09.95 provided that the appointment of other relations, namely, grand daughter, son-in-law, brother-ia-law, brother, sister, nephew, niece, daugliter-in-law, sister-in-iaw etc. was not in accordance with law. Therefore; appomtment made after 03.01.95 on the compassionate basis should be declared as illegal andbe accordmgly eancelled. The circuiar dated 10.09.95 declaring all the appointmeiits riot in accordance with law has been issued without any basis.with retrospeetive effect. The circular, m view ofthe settled position nflaw, caimottake away the rights oftlie ^saSite'sRs-ns*"** Sahu petitioner, wliich has accmed on accounf ofliis appointment in accordance with the circular dated 10.06.94 4. Leanied counsel appearing for the petitioner aswell as for the State/respondents jointly submit that the question of law involved in the present writ petition are the same as to thflt of iii W.P/SV No. 2632/2005 CJafdeeB Yavad Vs. Siate of Pradesh & otheis), whicli was allowed vide order dated 02.05.07. Thus, f!ie case ofthe petitioner is squarely covered by the judgineat aiid order dated 02-05.07 passed in W.P. No. 2632/2005 (Jaideep Yavad Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh & others) (Supra). 5. Ia view ofthe above-stated subinissions made by learaed counsel for the partieg, the writ petition is allowed inthe sametenns, subjectto verificationofthe facts. No order asto costs. ,' T~ '"• ~^: j Satish K. Agniltotri Judge %. > /.^SK