1. Petitioner in all these writ applications are the employees of Health Department. Their services have been terminated on the basis of report submitted by Five Men Committee consituted under the direction of High Court in L.P.A. No. 946 of 2003. The report has put the services of the employees in three categories, irregular, illegal, and forged. Petitioners who have been put in either illegal or forged category, are recommended for termination from service.

2. Facts of almost all the cases disclose that petitioners were appointed long time back right from 1969 to 1987 and thereafter. In some of the cases, appointment of the petitioners were declared illegal on the ground that appointment was made by way of regularization from daily wages employees by an authority who was not competent to make appointment. In some of the cases it has been stated that appointments were not made against sanctioned posts, following the procedure for regular and legal appointment, as such appointments are illegal. In some of the cases, it is stated that appointment letters, on the basis of which petitioners were appointed were not issued from the office of those authorities, who are said to be appointing authority as there is no such entry in register of the concerned office. Appointments made on the basis of such appointment letters have been put in the forged category.

3. It is essential that background of these cases should be discussed before analyzing the grounds taken by the petitioner for challenging the enquiry report/ impugned orders and reply submitted by the State to counter the submission made by the petitioners.

4. Petitioners were directly appointed on Class III posts and Class IV posts and thereafter regularized on their posts. In most of the cases, after their appointments, petitioners continued for more than ten years. They were regularized, their service books were opened and they were made permanent. In some of the cases, petitioners also received benefits of time bound promotion. Subsequently their appointments were questioned by the authorities and enquires were made. On account of questioning of their appointment and continuation of enquiry, salaries of some of the petitioners were withheld, as such, they approached the High Court for a direction to pay their salaries by filing writ applications. They got relief from the High Court and directions were issued for payment of salary, as it had been stopped without any finding recorded against genuineness or legality of their appointment. Petitioners thereafter started getting their salary. The enquiry proceeded and in most of the cases finally termination orders were issued on the ground that on the basis of forged letters appointments were made, appointment letters were issued by an incompetent authority against unsanctioned posts and also that appointments were made without observing the selection process for legal appointment, without advertising the posts, giving proper opportunity to eligible candi- dates to participate. A number of writ applications were filed challenging the termination orders. Those writ applications were decided by an order passed in C.W.J.C. No. 4702 of 2003 and analogous cases. Some of the cases in which termination orders were not quashed Letters Patent Appeals were filed. Appeals were also filed by the State against orders quashing termination orders. Some of the writ applications, which were filed challenging the termination order had remained pending. Finally L.P.As. preferred by the State as well as petitioners and pending writ applications, were heard analogous. L.P.A. No. 946 of 2003, became the leading case which was heard analogous with several L.P.As. and writ petitions. A marathon arguments were advanced by the petitioners as well as the State. Several questions were raised including the equity as petitioners have continued in their service for several years and in most of the cases their age for any new appointment had expired. F