Judgment S. N. Jha, J. 1. This writ petition has been filed for direction to the respondents to approve the services of the petitioner as an assistant teacher in Ram Chandra Prasad Gupta Girls High School, Hilsa, in the district of nalanda, and for consequential direction to pay him the salary of the post with effect from the date of take over, namely, 20th July, 1982. 2. In the writ petition the petitioner has made a claim for approval of the services under section 4 (2) of the Bihar Non-Government Secondary school (Taking Over of Management and Control) Act, 1981 ; during course of hearing, however, learned counsel for the petitioner conceded that as the school was not recognised on the date of tak over the case will not fall within the ambit of section 4 (2) According to the counsel, the petitioner is still entitled to have the services approved under section 3 (3) of the said act. The claim of the petitioner is resisted by the respondents on the ground that he does not possess the requisite qualification. According to the respondents, the requisite qualification for appointment on the post of Sanskrit teacher is degree of Acharya with Sahitya or Vyakaran or M. A / honours in Sanskrit with training as per Rule 4 (3) of the Bihar Nationalised secondary School (Service Condition) Rules, 1983. The petitioner holds the degree of Navin Shastri which is not recognised as an equivalent qualification. 3. Counsel for the petitioner drew my attention to rule 4 (13) of the bihar High School Service Conditions Rules, 1972 and the Government order dated 29th March 1963, marked Annexure-8 to the rejoinder affidavt, and submitted that the petitioner holds the requisite qualification. According to the respondents, however, the case of the petitioner will be covered by the Bihar Nationalised Secondary School (Service Conditions) Rules, 1983. The question, therefore, is which of the two Rules, the 1972 Rules or 1983 rules, will apply. 4. Counsel for the petitioner contended that 1983 Rules have come into force with effect from 20th June 1983 and, therefore, it cannot apply to the petitioner whose case is to be considered with reference to the date of take over, namely, 20th July 1982. In other words, it is suggested that the rules cannot have retrospective application I do not find any substance in the aforesaid plea. In other words, it is suggested that the rules cannot have retrospective application I do not find any substance in the aforesaid plea. Admittedly, the petitioner seek approval of the service under the Bihar Non-Government Secondary Schools (Taking Over of Management and Control) Act, 1981. The 1983 Rules have been framed under section 9 of the said Act laying down the conditions of service of the headmaster, teachers and other employees of the schools taken over under the Act. Thus, in substance, the Rules have been framed to implement and make the provisions of the Act workable. It cannot, therefore, be said that although the Act had come into force in 1982 (not to mention about the Ordinance which had precededl the Act) the old Rules of 1972 which had been framed under the Bihar High Schools (Control and Regulation of administration) Act, 1960, already repealed by the Bihar Secondary Education board Ordinance 1974/act, 1976, would continue to hold the field. The argument, if accepted, would lead to an anomolous situation. The petitioner seeks approval of his services under the 1961 Act. The 1983 rules have been framed laying down, inter alia, the qualifications for appointment in schools taken over under that Act. There can be no doubt that the 1983 Rules will apply as the Act under which 1972 rules had been framed itself having been repealed. The plea is thus rejected. 5. I do not find any merit in this application and the same is, accordingly, dismissed. No order as to cost. Petition Dismissed.