Appointments must be validated through due process; wrongful termination without fair hearing violates Article 311 rights, making the claim for retiree benefits legally enforceable.

JUDGMENT :

HARISH KUMAR, J.

Heard Mr. Shiv Kumar, learned Advocate for the petitioner, Mr. Kamlesh Kishore, learned Advocate for the State and Mr. Ram Kinker Choubey, learned Advocate for the Accountant General.

2. The original petitioner came before this Court seeking a direction upon the respondent authorities to fix and pay all his retiral benefits, including pension, gratuity, leave encashment, provident fund, group insurance and other legal dues payable to him after counting his entire period of service from 18.01.1981 to 30.06.2014 as well as the benefits under ACP/MACP with up-to-date interest.

3. It would be pertinent to mention here that during the pendency of the writ petition, the original petitioner died on 12.10.2024 and pursuant to the order of this Court dated 05.12.2024, the wife of the original petitioner came to be substituted, who has been pursuing this matter.

4. The relevant admitted facts, as has been culled out from the materials available on record, are that the husband of the petitioner was duly appointed to the post of Male Family Welfare Worker by the Civil Surgeon-cum-Chief Medical Officer, Ranchi under Memo No.88 dated 15.01.1981 and accordingly he submitted his joining on 18.01.1981 in the office of the In-charge Medical Officer, Primary Health Center, Palkot, Ranchi. Subsequently, the husband of the petitioner was transferred to the Primary Health Center, Birpur, Saharsa and accordingly he was relieved on 04.01.1982. The services of the husband of the petitioner along with several other persons were confirmed vide Memo No.3330 dated 27.12.1990 by the order of the Civil Surgeon-cum-Chief Medical Officer, Saharsa.

5. On being satisfied and after completion of ten years of service, the husband of the petitioner was extended benefit of first time bound promotion in terms with the Resolution No.10770 dated 30.12.1981 issued by the Finance Department, Bihar. The husband of the petitioner also passed Hindi Noting and Drafting Examination in the year 1997 itself. While the husband of the petitioner was discharging his duty on the afore- noted post, all of a sudden, vide order contained in Memo No.514 dated 30.04.2003, his service was terminated by the Civil Surgeon-cum-Chief Medical Officer, Supaul, on the ground of his appointment being declared as illegal based upon the forged appointment letter. This order of termination was challenged by the husband of the petitioner in C.W.J.C. No.5707 of 2003; which application was allowed with a direction to reinstate the petitioner in service with liberty to the State Government to identify such cases and take disciplinary action after holding enquiry and giving an opportunity of being heard to them.

6. The State being aggrieved assailed the order of the learned Single Judge in L.P.A. No.984 of 2003, wherein the learned Division Bench relegated the matter to the authorities of the Health Department, Bihar directing them to reconsider the case of all the affected employees on the basis of relevant facts and law settled in para-44 of the judgment passed in the case of Secretary, State of Karnataka and Others v. Uma Devi (3) and Others [ (2006) 4 SCC 1 ].

7. It would be pertinent to note here that pursuant to the direction of the learned Division Bench of this Court, a Five Men Committee was constituted to examine the nature and status of appointment of affected person(s) and after completion of the enquiry, the husband of the petitioner was communicated with an enquiry report by which his appointment was again held to be forged by the Enquiry Com