JUDGMENT :

Heard Mr. A. Allam, the learned Senior counsel for the petitioners and Mr. O.P. Tiwary, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondent State.

2. This writ petition has been heard through Video Conferencing in view of the guidelines of the High Court taking into account the situation arising due to COVID-19 pandemic. None of the parties have complained about any technical snag of audio-video and with their consent this matter has been heard.

3. The petitioners have preferred this writ petition for quashing the order dated 04.10.2016 as contained in Annexure-6 whereby the petitioners' services have been terminated.

4. The petitioner no.1 whose date of birth is 01.11.1975 has passed High School in the year 1991 with 2nd Division and passed in Intermediate in the year 1994 with 1st Division. He also passed Graduation in the year 1998 in 1st Division and after joining the service he passed B.Ed by way of correspondence course from Lalit Narayan Mithila University in the year 2011. The petitioner no.2 whose date of birth is 03.01.1976 has passed the High School in the year 1991 with 1st Division, Intermediate with Science in the year 1994 with 1st Division, B.Sc in Maths, Physics and Chemistry in the year 1997 with 1st Division and B.Ed session 2002-03, result of which declared in the year 2005. Pursuant to the advertisement of the year 2006 whereby the posts for appointment of the teachers were advertised, the petitioners applied for the appointment on the said posts on contractual basis against the fixed sum of Rs.5,500/- per month. The petitioner no. 1 was having English as subsidiary subject in Graduation, he applied for the post of English Teacher and the petitioner no.2 was Science Gradutate, he applied against the Math subject.The petitioners were called for interview and they were interviewed 28.06.2006 and were declared successful for the appointment. The petitioners were appointed pursuant to the letter of the Department of Welfare Government of Jharkhand dated 20.09.2006. The petitioner no.1 was posted as English Teacher in the S.C. Residential High School, Palamau and the petitioner no.2 was posted as Maths Teacher in S.T. Residential High School in the district of Giridih. The petitioners' services were extended on 18.12.2007 for a further period of one year and in the same and similar manner on 13.12.2008, 25.02.2010, 05.07.2011, 04.11.2011, 09.11.2012, 19.03.2014, 27.07.2014, 07.08.2015 and 21.03.2016 respectively and their salary has been were extended with enhanced salary to the extent of Rs.29,907/- per month which were paid in the year 2016. The case of the petitioners for extension was also recommended by way of the Deputy Director, Department of Welfare by way of Annexure-4 series. Their work was also appreciated by way of Annexure-5 series by the higher authorities. By way of Annexure-6 series the petitioners have been terminated. Aggrieved with this, the petitioners have moved before this Court in the writ petition.

5. Mr. A. Allam, the learned Senior counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners submits that by the impugned order the services of the petitioner has been terminated without following the procedure of law. He submits that in four lines order, the career of the ten years has been brought to an end without issuing any show cause which is very harsh. He submits that the petitioners are having good educational qualification and were providing education to the students which is apparent from the Annexure-4 series which are the recommendations for extension of the services of the petitioners. He submits that now the State Government has further came out with the advertisement for appointment on contractual basis which is against the principle of law. He submits that it is well settled that an ad hod cannot be replaced by another ad hoc. He submits that it was open to the Government of Jharkhand to go for regular appointment in accordance with law. He submits that the impugned order is