Dipak Misra, J.

1. The present appeal was preferred under Clause-X of the Letters Patent assailing the defensibility of the order dated 30.4.2009 passed by the learned Single Judge in CWJC No. 10795 of 2006.

2. When the matter was heard by the Division Bench, the Bench came across a decision rendered in Brajesh Kumar V/s. The State of Bihar & Ors., 2010(1) PLJR 339 wherein a reference was made to the Bihar Panchayat Primary Teacher (Appointment and Service Conditions) Rules, 2006 (hereinafter referred to as the 2006 Rules), resolution no. 12754 dated 12.7.1997, letter no. 6905 dated 17.10.2008 and notification dated 22.6.2009 issued by the Department of Personnel & Administrative Reforms, Government of Bihar pertaining to compassionate appointment, and further, the Division Bench decision rendered in Dilip Kumar Bhattacharya V/s. The State of Bihar & Ors., 2004(4) PLJR 889 and, eventually, it was held that the legal heir of deceased teacher, who was appointed much prior to coming into force of the 2006 Rules, is entitled to be appointed on a Government post and not on the post of Panchayat/Prakhand/Nagar Shikshak as the District Compassionate Committee which recommends for compassionate appointment cannot recommend for such posts.

3. The Division Bench hearing the matter, after taking note of the basic nature of compassionate appointment, various notifications in the field and the circular dated 26.2.2009, thought it appropriate that the matter should be heard and disposed of by a larger Bench to put the controversy to rest from all spectrums. Thus, the matter has been placed before us.

4. Presently, to the facts which are requisite to be exposited for the purpose of adjudication of the appeal. The father of the respondent-writ petitioner (hereinafter referred to as the respondent), a teacher in Upgraded Middle School, Lodipur, Anchal- Koilwar, District-Bhojpur, died-in-harness on 23.3.2005. The respondent, who fulfilled the criteria to be appointed on compassionate basis, being covered under the scheme, submitted an application before the District Superintendent of Education, Bhojpur, who, in turn, forwarded the same to the District Compassionate Committee (for short the Committee), Bhojpur. The committee on due deliberation on 7.12.2005 recommended him for appointment in the Education Department. Despite the said recommendation, no appointment was made, and, therefore, the writ petitioner approached this Court for issue of a writ of mandamus commanding the respondents therein to appoint him without any delay.

5. A counter affidavit was filed by the District Superintendent of Education, Bhojpur, Ara, the respondent no. 6 in the writ petition, stating, inter alia, that the petitioner had already been appointed on the post of Prakhand Teacher and joined on the post. It was put forth in the return that after receipt of the resolution of the Committee, the matter was processed in the light of the departmental Notification No. 974 dated 1.7.2006 and, eventually, a communication was made by the District Superintendent of Education, Bhojpur, Ara to the writ petitioner on 28.9.2006 vide Annexure-A requiring his consent to be appointed as Prakhand Teacher. As there was initially no response, a reminder was sent on 3.11.2006 vide Annexure-B and, thereafter, the respondent-writ petitioner by communication dated 12.3.2007 requested the authorities to appoint him on the post of Prakhand Teacher in Koilwar Block. On the basis of the said letter, he was appointed on the post of Prakhand Teacher vide Memo No. 15 dated 4.7.2007 issued by the Block Development Officer, Koilwar and posted in the Middle School, Khangaon, Koilwar where he had already joined on 5.7.2007.

6. A supplementary affidavit was filed on behalf of the respondent-writ petitioner by way of rejoinder contending, inter alia, that the authorities have not acted in accordance with the recommendation made by the Committee inasmuch as they had offered the post of Prakhand