ORAL ORDER Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the State. 2. The petitioner is aggrieved by the order dated 28.9.2011 communicated to him on 14.10.2011 declining to consider him for compassionate appointment in view of a Circular of the State Government dated 23.6.2005. 3. It is submitted that the first wife of the father of the petitioner was divorced in his lifetime. The deceased remarried one Bibi Hasina. He then married Bibi Nazia from whom the petitioner was born and is the eldest son. There is no other claimant for compassionate appointment through Bibi Hasina or Bibi Nazia neither are they claimants themselves. Both the wives live together and have consented to the petitioner as the eldest son of the family to be considered for compassionate appointment. Strong reliance is placed on a Bench decision of the Court reported in 2005 (2) P.L.J.R. 467 (Abshar Ahmad @ Abshar vs. The State of Bihar & Ors.). 4. Learned counsel for the State has opposed the application relying on a government circular dated 23.6.2005. It is contended that the father of the petitioner solemnized the second marriage during the subsistence of the first without government permission violating Rule 23 of the Bihar Government Servant Conduct Rules, 1976 (Hereinafter referred to as the Rules). Section-23 reads as follows: – “23. Restrictions regarding marriages.–(1) No Government servant shall enter into, or contract, a marriage with a person having a spouse living; and; (2) No Government servant, having a spouse living shall enter into, or contract, a marriage with any person: Provided that Government may permit a Government servant to enter into, or contract, any such marriage as is referred to in clause (1) or clause (2) if it is satisfied that – (a) such marriage is permissible under the personal law applicable to such Government servant and the other party to the marriage; and (b) there are other grounds for so doing. (3) A Government servant who has married or marries a person other than of Indian Nationality shall forthwith intimate the fact to the Government.” 5. (3) A Government servant who has married or marries a person other than of Indian Nationality shall forthwith intimate the fact to the Government.” 5. In the case of Abshar Ahmad (supra) considering the purpose of compassionate appointment, to save the family of the deceased from penury and destituteness, giving a purposive interpretation to Section 23 holding that if the need of the family was genuine otherwise as discussed in paragraph-7, the Rules permitting a second marriage according to Muslim Personal Law, the relief for appointment came to be granted deeming it that permission had been accorded for the second marriage. As a co-ordinate Bench the decision binds it. 6. No other ground has been urged from the impugned order to deny eligibility for compassionate appointment. 7. Following Abshar Ahmad (supra) the writ application has to be allowed. The impugned order dated 28.9.2011/14.10.2011 is set aside insofar as it relates to the petitioner. 8. The respondents are directed to consider his case for compassionate appointment expeditiously preferably within a maximum period of three months from the date of receipt/production of a copy of this order. 9. The writ application is allowed.