ORDER 1. We place on record the valuable assistance Shri Sharma has rendered in disposal of this petition. He has laboured to trace an important Government circular of 1-11-1971 of which a copy is placed on record. Counsel has also drawn our attention to the fact that the subsequent Government circular dated 22-8-1980 nowhere says that the earlier Notification of 1971 shall be deemed superseded. He has submitted that both notifications are to be read together and indeed subsequent one has to be read as supplementary only. 2. The impugned order in this case is dated 9-12-1989 by which the clerk of Court of the Office of District and Sessions Judge, Bhind informed the petitioner Shivcharanlal Saxena that his application dated 30-11-1989 for compassionate appointment has been rejected. It is stated that the petitioner was not qualified for the appointment in terms of clause (5) of Circular dated 22-8-1980. He was asked to appear at the interview and take chance for a merit appointment. 3. Shri Sharma's reliance on the following extract from circular dated 1-11-1971 regards appropriate : tgk ifjokj esa ,d O;fDr dekusokyk gS fdUrq mldh vkenuh lEiw.kZ ifjokj ds ikyuiks"k.k ds fy, vi;kZIr gks ogk foHkkxk/;{k vius iz'kkldh; foHkkx dh vuqefr ls mlds ifjokj ds ,d vkSj lnL; dks j crk;s vuqlkj fu;qDr dj ldsxkA iz'kkldh; foHkkx ,Sls ekeys esa viuh vuqefr nsus ls igys ;g lqfuf'pr djsxk fd D;k e`rd 'kkldh; lsod }kjk NksM+k x;k ifjokj rFkk mldh lEif vkSj nsunkjh dks ns[krs gq, bl izdkj dh lgwfy;r nsuk tk;t gSA 4. Still, we direct office that while sending copy of this order for compliance to learned District and Sessions Judge, Bhind the entire bunch of papers relating to circular dated 1-11-1971 filed by Shri Sharma, shall be sent. 5. Shri Sharma has submitted that petitioner's mother had to work because his father did not keep good health and in fact, income of the family had to be supplement. He has submitted that petitioner's father is drawing a salary of Rs. 700/- only, but most of the amount is spent on his treatment. Otherwise, possess no immovable property. In that regard, affidavit has been filed. 6. In the circumstances aforesaid, we have no doubt that application of the petitioner dated 30-11-1989 for compassionate appointment has not been properly disposed of. 700/- only, but most of the amount is spent on his treatment. Otherwise, possess no immovable property. In that regard, affidavit has been filed. 6. In the circumstances aforesaid, we have no doubt that application of the petitioner dated 30-11-1989 for compassionate appointment has not been properly disposed of. We accordingly direct learned District and Sessions Judge, Behind for making a proper disposal of that in the light of observations herein made and for relevant Government circulars. Within two months, after making proper enquiry, as contemplated under the circular of 1-11-1971, final disposal of the application shall be made. Copy of the affidavit of the petitioner filed in this matter shall also accompany copy of the order to be transmitted to the learned District and Sessions Judge, Bhind. 7. Petition is disposed of with the above observations and directions. CC today.