Purnendu Singh, J.—Heard Mr. Jagnnath Singh, learned counsel along with Mr. Md. Ghulam Mustafa, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners and Mr. Abhishek Singh, learned AC to GA-7 appearing on behalf of the respondents.

2. The petitioners in paragraph no. 1 of the present writ petition has sought, inter alia, following relief(s), which is reproduced hereinafter:—

“I. For issuance of a writ in the nature of certiorari or any other appropriate writ / order / direction for quashing the letter bearing memo no. 84 (11) dated 08.03.1999 (Annexure-8) issued by Additional Commissioner-cum- Special Secretary, Department of Health, Government of Bihar, Patna and the letters issued by the concerned Civil Surgeon-cum- Chief Medical Officers of Madhepura, Aurangabad, Begusarai, Patna, Gopalganj, Siwan, Motihari and Saharsa to the concerned District Leprosy Officers of the said districts and also the letters issued by the concerned District Leprosy Officers in compliance of the letter bearing memo no. 84 (11) dated 08.03.1999 by which the petitioners were removed from their service.

II. For reinstating the petitioners on their post on Non-Medical Assistant with effect from the date on which they were removed in the light of letter bearing memo no. 84 (11) dated 08.03.1999 (Annexure- 8)

III. For issuing directions to pay the consequential benefits from the date on which the petitioners were removed from their service, including the salaries and other emoluments payable to the petitioners.

IV. For giving the petitioners the same and similar treatment which has been accorded to the petitioners of C.W.J.C. No. 6575 of 2009 (Om Prakash vs. The State of Bihar and others) by its order and other analogous cases vide its order dated 06.10.2009 as also C.W.J.C. No. 9421 of 2009 (Lila Devi vs. The State of Bihar and others) along with its analogous cases by its order dated 12.11.2009 and W.P.S. No. 628 of 2010 (Prem Chandra Tiwary vs. The State of Jharkhand and others) disposed of on 04.05.2010 and the order dated 16.01.2012 passed C.W.J.C. No. 3191 of 2011.

V. For any other relief to which the petitioners are found entitled by this Hon'ble Court.”

3. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners submitted that the petitioners, who are ten in numbers, have preferred the present writ petition and they are the employees of the Health Department. The petitioners are aggrieved by the action of the State for terminating their services on the ground that their appointment were illegal on the basis of the report submitted by a Five Men Committee, constituted in compliance of the direction of the Court in LPA No. 946 of 2003 (The State of Bihar and Ors. vs. Purendra Sulan Kit). The report has put the services of the employees in three categories: irregular, illegal and forged. The petitioners, have been put either in illegal or forged category, are recommended for termination from services. The petitioners have given, in tabular form in paragraph no.5, their date of appointment and place of posting. All of them were appointed on different dates in the year 1987.

4. Learned counsel further submitted that when the termination order affected en masse of the employees, being aggrieved by the same, several writ petitions were filed. The matter went up to the Division Bench and considering the grievances of the employees, the Division Bench directed the State Government to constitute a five men committee in the case of State of Bihar vs. Purendra Sulan Kit, reported in 2006 (3) PLJR 386, to scrutinize their cases. Learned counsel also submitted that by the time, the Apex Court while considering the grievance of the similarly situated employees in the case of State of Karnataka & Ors. vs. M.L. Kesari & Ors., reported in (2010) 9 SCC 247, had framed guidelines to categorize the employees under different categories. The next contention of the petitioners is that the petitioners before getting terminated from services, they were not given any opportunity