Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:81301 Court No. - 6 Case :- WRIT - A No. - 2677 of 2019 Petitioner :- Ashvani Kumar Sharma Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Ashok Khare, Sr. Advocate,Ishwar Chandra Tyagi,Sunil Kumar Srivastava Counsel for Respondent :- Bhupesh Pratap Singh,C.S.C.,Prem Prakash Yadav Hon'ble Saurabh Shyam Shamshery,J. 1. Heard Sri Sunil Kumar Srivastava, learned counsel for petitioner and Ms. Raj Laxmi Sinha, learned Standing Counsel for State. 2. It is a case where compassionate appointment of the year 1997 was set aside in the year 2019 i.e. after 22 years on a ground that petitioner has not submitted correct information i.e. his living parent was a government employee when he was granted compassionate appointment as well as his application was considered after 5 years of death of his father. 3. Learned counsel submits that in application form, petitioner has disclosed that form was submitted after 5 years of death of his father with a specific assertion that he became minor as well as a bar that claim would not be considered if living parent was in government service came later on by way of Notification dated 04.09.2000, therefore, it would not be applicable to petitioner, since it has no retrospective effect. 4. In support of his submissions, he has placed reliance upon judgments of Anupam Kushwaha vs. State of U.P. and others, 2025:AHC:57361 and Lokesh Kumar Mirg vs. State of U.P. and others, 2025:AHC:34621. 5. Learned counsel for petitioner also submits that an interim order was passed by this Court on 21.02.2019 which is honoured till date and petitioner is still working. 5. Learned Standing Counsel has tried to oppose above submissions, however, she is not able to convince this Court since it is well settled that any appointment shall be made only in terms of prevailing Rules and any contrary Rule came into existence afterwards would not have any adverse effect since it cannot act being retrospectively except declared so. 6. In view of above, Court takes note of above judgments that even there is a minor irregularity in compassionate appointment, it could be protected and if the petitioner unsuited after substantial period i.e. in present case after more than 20 years, it would be travesty of justice. 7. In aforesaid circumstances, Court is of considered opinion that impugned order can not survive, therefore, it is set aside and its legal consequence shall follow. 8. Writ petition stands disposed of with above observations. Order Date :- 16.5.2025 Sinha_N. Digitally signed by :- NIRMAL SINHA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad