DEVINDER GUPTA, J. ( 1 ) THE order passed by the learned Single Judge on 16-08-2002 in W. P. No. 15050 of 2002 allowing the writ petition of the respondent is under challenge in this appeal by the District Collector, Warangal. ( 2 ) THE respondent filed the writ petition praying for issuance of a direction declaring the action of the appellant in rejecting to provide Government employment to her to be illegal; and consequently sought direction to provide employment to her on the ground that her husband was killed in extremists activities on 09-02-1993. The respondent prayed the relief in the writ petition on the basis of G. O. Ms. No. 469 General Administration (SC. A) Department dated 08-11-1996 (for short the G. O. Ms. 469 ). ( 3 ) THE learned single Judge proceeded to grant the relief to the respondent by relying on the G. O. Ms. 469 and the decision of a learned Single Judge of this Court in CHOPPADANDI NARSUBAI Vs. CHIEF SECRETARY, TO GOVERNMENT, GENERAL ADMINISTRATION (SC. A) DEPARTMENT, HYDERABAD and ANOTHER ( 2000 (4) ALD 350 ). ( 4 ) G. O. MS. 469 was issued on 08-11-1996. The said order made reference to earlier G. O. Ms. No. 70 General Administration (SC. A) Department dated 26-02-1996 wherein State Government had issued orders enhancing the exgratia relief to the victims of extremists violence and relief towards damages to properties. By the G. O. Ms. 469, certain guidelines were issued, amongst other things, for immediate payment of exgratia relief to the next of the kin of the persons killed/injured in the extremist violence and relief towards damages to properties. As a further measure of relief to the victims of extremist violence and also police firings, the government have decided to provide employment to the son or a daughter or spouse of any person killed in extremist violence or in police firing. Accordingly, Andhra Pradesh (Regulation of Appointments to Public Services and Rationalisation of Staff Pattern and Pay Structure) Act, 1994 (Act 2 of 1994) has been amended suitably by the A. P. Ordinance No. 24 of 1996 dated 28-10-1996 and accordingly on 08-11-1996 G. O. Ms. 469 was issued authorising the Collectors to issue orders in respect of any department where there is a vacancy for appointment of person upto the level of Junior Assistant/typist depending upon the qualifications of the applicants. 469 was issued authorising the Collectors to issue orders in respect of any department where there is a vacancy for appointment of person upto the level of Junior Assistant/typist depending upon the qualifications of the applicants. The Collectors are authorized to grant relaxation of age on case-to-case basis. Paragraph No. 4 of the G. O. Ms. 469 made it clear that these orders will come into effect from 26-02-1996 viz. , the date of issuance of G. O. Ms. No. 70 General Administration (SC. A) Department dated 26-02-1996. ( 5 ) IN Choppadandi s case (supra), the learned Single Judge of this Court granted relief to the petitioner in the said case where her husband had been murdered by extremists, on the ground that in G. O. Ms. 469 nowhere it refers to any cut off date for granting relief to the persons murdered by extremists. Accordingly gave benefit of the said G. O. and allowed the writ petition. Relying on the said decision, the impugned order was passed by the learned Single Judge. With due respect, the view expressed by the learned Single Judge in Choppadandi s case (supra) and relied upon by the learned Single Judge in the impugned order is not the correct law, since the G. O. Ms. 469 in question specifically makes it clear that the order will come into force from 26-02-1996, when Government has issued G. O. Ms. No. 70 dated 26-02-1996 enhancing the ex-gratia relief to the victims of extremists violence and relief towards damages to properties. It is the fundamental principle of law that any order issued is deemed to be perspective in nature. When G. O. Ms. No. 469 made specifically clear that the order will come into effect from 26-02-1996, retrospective effect is given to the said G. O. Ms. No. 469 with effect from 26-02-1996 and not any other date prior thereto. The petitioner s husband expired on 09-02-1993. On that day, there is no right vested in her to seek employment. Therefore, benefit under G. O. Ms. No. 469 cannot be given. The view expressed in Choppadandi s case (supra) and followed by the learned single Judge is not the correct view. Thus, the appeal is allowed. The impugned order is set aside. The writ petition filed is dismissed. Both the parties shall bear their own costs.