JUDGEMENT 1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the State. 2. Petitioners grievance is that his service as Panchayat Teacher has illegally been cancelled by the order contained in Letter No. 46 dated 26.12.2007 issued by Gram Panchayat Secretary (respondent No.9). 3. Two grounds have been taken for assailing the impugned order; One of the grounds is that the impugned order has been passed in violation of the Rule of Natural Justice. Another ground is that on the basis of an executive order in violation of the provisions of Bihar Panchayat Primary Teachers (Appointment and Service Conditions) Rules, 2006, the impugned order has been passed. 4. Petitioner possesses Upshastri Degree from Kameshwar Singh Darbhanga University, Darbhanga. 1 find that termination order challenged by several other writ petitioners in C.W.J.C. No. 2456 of 2008 (Ribha Rani & Others V/s. The State of Bihar) as well as analogous cases, has already been decided by this court holding that the executive decisions on the basis of which termination order has been passed, is contrary to eligiblity criteria laid down in the rules as change in the eligibility criteria can be brought only by suitable amendment in the rules. It has also been decided by this decision that the State Government, if so inclined, can alter its policy decision but only on prospective date as observed by this court in Ribha Rani and analogous cases. Rules for appointment of primary teachers have been amended whereby persons holding Maulvi and Shastri degrees are held to be not entitled for being appointed as Primary Teachers. The effect of amended rules is prospective as well as Rule 20 of the amended Rules also provides that any decision taken under 2006 Rules or any of these rules and conditions of the persons appointed under 2006 Rules will have no effect under the amended rules. 5. The petitioner was appointed much earlier and as per the appointment rules, the impugned order of termination dated 26.12.2007 is, accordingly, quashed in the light of earlier decision of C.W.J.C. No. 2456 of 2008 & analogous cases. The respondents are directed to reinstate the petitioner forthwith with all consequential benefits.