JUDGMENT S.J. Mukhopadhaya, J. 1. The writ petitioner-respondent Vijay Nand Mishra was in the services of the State of Bihar in its T.B. Sanitorium, Itki, Ranchi. His services were terminated without giving any notice by impugned order dated 18th October, 1996 on the ground that his appointment was made at the instance of Dr. A.A. Mallick, the then Deputy Director, T.B., Bihar, Patna. 2. The learned Single Judge by impugned judgment and order dated 3rd October, 1997 in C.W.J.C. No. 3705 of 1996 (R), held the termination order as illegal and unjustified. The learned Single Judge also took into consideration that the writ petitioner-Vijay Nand Mishra having completed about 30 years of service, i.e. 14 years in the T.B. Sanitorium, Ranchi and about 16 years after absorption in Itki Sanitorium, Ranchi, granted relief in favour of the writ petitioner. 3. In this appeal, the appellants State of Bihar and others have taken similar plea that the appointment of writ petitioner-respondent Vij ay Nand Mishra having made at the instance of Dr. A.A. Mallick is illegal, he was rightly terminated from service. 4. Without any leave of this Court, a number of enclosures attached by the appellants in this appeal, though many of them were not brought to the notice of the learned Single Judge. Those documents such as Government of Bihars Memo No. 528, dated 30th April, 1993 (Annexure-3 to writ petition); writ petitioners representation dated 21st June, 1980 (Annexure-3 to L.P.A.); letter No. 71, dated 22nd July. 1980 issued by the General Secretary, Bihar T.B. Association (Annexure-4 to L.P.A.); letter No. 2314 dated 8th September, 1980 issued by the Superintendent, Itki Sanitorium (An-nexure-7 to L.P.A.); Service Book of writ petitioner (Annexure-8 to L.P.A.); letter No. 1896, dated 28th July, 1978 of Superintendent of Itki Sanitorium (Annexure-10 to L.P.A.); and letter No. 1987 dated 28th July, 1978 (Annexure-11 to L.P.A.) were placed by the counsel for the appellant to suggest that the appointment of writ petitioner Vijay Nand Mishra was made at the instance of Dr. A.A. Mallick, the then Deputy Director, T.B., Bihar, Patna. 5. It is pertinent to mention here as to why much stress is being given on the name of Dr. A.A. Mallick then Deputy Director, T.B. Sanitorium, Bihar, Patna. He made about 7000 appointment in the Health Department of State of Bihar directly or indirectly and mostly against non-existant posts. A.A. Mallick, the then Deputy Director, T.B., Bihar, Patna. 5. It is pertinent to mention here as to why much stress is being given on the name of Dr. A.A. Mallick then Deputy Director, T.B. Sanitorium, Bihar, Patna. He made about 7000 appointment in the Health Department of State of Bihar directly or indirectly and mostly against non-existant posts. Certain orders of appointments were issued under his signature as Deputy Director, T.B., Bihar, whereas certain orders of appointments were issued by other authorities such as Civil Surgeons of districts on the recommendation of Dr. A.A. Mallick. There were instances, in which the persons who were not even in service, were shown to have been transferred and allowed to join at another place as transferred employees. In this background, after notice in the newspaper, a detailed enquiry was made and on receipt of reply and enquiry report, those who were appointed by Dr. Mallick, their services were terminated by the State of Bihar, vide Memo No. 528 dated 30th April, 1993. In the aforesaid background in the impugned order of termination No. 2552 dated 18th October, 1996, it is alleged that the appointment of writ petitioner Vijay Nand Mishra having made on the recommendation of Dr. A.A. Mallick by letter No. 71 dated 22nd July, 1980 and in view of Government Order No. 528, dated 30th April, 1993 (Annexure-3 to the writ petition) the order has been passed. The Order No. 528, dated 30th April, 1993 by which number of persons appointed by Dr. A.A. Mallick or on his recommendation, were terminated was challenged by those who were affected before the Patna High Court. They having lost, moved before the Apex Court. The Supreme Court in the case of Ashwini Kumar v. State of Bihar and others, (1997) 2 SCC 1 , while upheld the order of termination dated 30th April, 1993, made certain observations. Before this Court, the learned counsel for the appellants State of Bihar and others mainly relied on the following observations made by the Supreme Court. "Even though these petitioners concerned might have been actually appointed by Dr. Mithlesh Kumar their appointments were recommended by Dr. Mallick who, therefore, remained the prime mover in their cases also and in the cases of all the other appellants. It is the hand of Dr. "Even though these petitioners concerned might have been actually appointed by Dr. Mithlesh Kumar their appointments were recommended by Dr. Mallick who, therefore, remained the prime mover in their cases also and in the cases of all the other appellants. It is the hand of Dr. Mallick which brought them under the Tuberculosis Eradication Scheme and but for him they would not have got their entry." 6. The only question arises in the present appeal for determination as to whether the writ petitioner Vijay Nand Mishra was appointed on the recommendation or by Dr. A.A. Mallick, the then Deputy Director, T.B. Bihar, Patna and thereby covered .by the Memo No. 528, dated 30th April, 1993 or not. 7. The counsel for the appellants relied on the enclosures, as referred earlier tosubstantiate that the writ petitioner Vijay Nand Mishra was appointed at the instance of Dr. A.A. Mallick. 8. For determination of the issue, it is necessary to take into consideration the relevant facts chronologically, as mentioned here under. 9. From the Service Book enclosed by the appellants, it appears that the writ petitioner Vijay Nand Mishra was appointed as T.B.C. Clerk, most probably T.B. Clinic Clerk, vide Order No. 1161, dated 22nd May, 1962. Such appointment was made by the Bihar Tuberculosis Association (Association for short), a Society of which Governor of Bihar was the patron. However, the joining was accepted in the forenoon of 23rd May, 1967 in the Itki Sanitorium a wing of the State Government. The stand of the State is that the appointment was made in T.B. Clinic which was being run by the Association. 10. It is not clear as to how the State Government in its Itki Sanitorium can take work from those who were appointed by the Association for its Clinic, but from the record and Service Book, it appears that some sort of arrangement of deputation may have been made. For release of increment, confirmation and promotion, as per State Governments Rules, a clerk is required to pass certain departmental examination, such as Hindi Noting and Drafting Examination and Accounts Examination. The writ petitioner Vijay Nand Mishra was allowed to appear in the Hindi Noting and Drafting Examination on 14th July, 1974 and his result was declared by the State Government, vide letter No. 1 dated 3rd January, 1975. The writ petitioner Vijay Nand Mishra was allowed to appear in the Hindi Noting and Drafting Examination on 14th July, 1974 and his result was declared by the State Government, vide letter No. 1 dated 3rd January, 1975. The State Government also allowed the writ petitioner to appear in the first part of the Accounts examination on 9th September, 1973 result of which was declared by the State Government, vide letter No. 18-22/73, dated 12th February, 1974. He was also allowed by the State Government to appear in the final part of the Accounts examination on 22nd May, 1977 and State Government published result, vide letter No. 18-21/76-1, dated 18th January, 1966, as mentioned in the Service Book. Curiously, though he was an employee of the Association, but the Service Book was maintained in the year 1977 by the Superintendent, Itki Sanitorium, Itki, Ranchi where they were taking work from the writ petitioner. 11. It may be mentioned that the Governor of Bihar was the Patron of Association; Dr. M. Pathak. Chairman; Dr. K.K. Sinha, General Secretary; and Dr. A.A. Mallick, ex-officio Joint General Secretary. 12. It appears that in pursuance of telephonic conversation of the Executive Members of the Association and D.O. letter of Superintendent, Itki Sanitorium, vide letter dated 11th September, 1978, the respondent-writ petitioner Vijay Nand Mishra was asked to join the office of General Secretary, Bihar Tuberculosis Association from which office he was drawing pay. At that state, the writ petitioner made certain request for absorption of his service under the Itki Sanitorium which was recommended by the Governing Body in its meeting dated 15th January, 1979, as evident from Mishras application dated 21st July, 1980 (Annexure-2 to L.P.A.). Nothing having made, the writ petitioner Mishra again represented on 21st July, 1980 (Annexure- 2 to L.P.A.) before the Superintendent, Itki Sanitorium, Ranchi through the General Secretary of Association, Patna for his absorption in the Itki Sanitorium. Such representation was forwarded by the Association, vide letter No. 71, dated 22nd July, 1980. As on the date, Dr. A.A. Mallick being the ex-officio General Secretary of Association at Patna forwarded the application of writ petitioner. It is only thereafter, the writ petitioner Mishra was taken in the services of Itki Sanitorium, Itki by order, contained in Memo No. 225, dated 31st August, 1980 issued by the Superintendent, Itki Sanitorium Itki. 13. As on the date, Dr. A.A. Mallick being the ex-officio General Secretary of Association at Patna forwarded the application of writ petitioner. It is only thereafter, the writ petitioner Mishra was taken in the services of Itki Sanitorium, Itki by order, contained in Memo No. 225, dated 31st August, 1980 issued by the Superintendent, Itki Sanitorium Itki. 13. The counsel for the appellants mainly relied on the letter No. 71, dated 22nd July, 1980 (Annexure-3 to L.P.A.)to suggest that Dr. Mallick forwarded one application of writ petitioner Mishra. This is the only document on which he highlighted that the appointment of writ petitioner is at the instance of Dr. Mallick. On the basis of aforesaid document, he relied on a particular part of Supreme Courts decision in Ashwird Kumar (supra), as quoted above However, such submission cannot be accepted, as the case of writ petitioner Mishra being different to those who were appointed by Dr. Mallick or on his recommendation. In the present case, the writ petitioner Mishra was already in the services of Association since 1967, the work used to be taken from him in the Itki Sanitorium. He applied for his absorption through the General Secretary of Association, Patna and naturally, it was the duty of the General Secretary to forward it to the competent authority of the State Government. If the Ex- General Secretary of Association was Dr. A.A. Mallick as in July, 1980, the appointment/absorption cannot be doubted on that basis. 14. The counsel for the appellant-State also placed reliance on the Itki Tuberculosis Sanitorium Local Authority (Officers and Servants) Rules, 1957 to suggest that the appointment was not made in accordance with the Rules. However, such submission cannot be accepted as no procedure for appointment laid down therein nor it was cited before the learned Single Judge. The appellants State having not shown such ground in the order of termination, also cannot enlarge the ground. Further Rule, 1957 as cited shows that the Itki Tuberculosis Sanitorium is itself a local authority, thus the appellants State cannot impose any direction on it. 15. Since writ petitioner Vijay Nand Mishra served in the Itki Sanitorium for long thirty years. 14 years as employee of the Association and 16 years after absorption in the Itki Sanitorium, it was not proper for the State to reopen the issue of legality and propriety of appointment of writ petitioner. 15. Since writ petitioner Vijay Nand Mishra served in the Itki Sanitorium for long thirty years. 14 years as employee of the Association and 16 years after absorption in the Itki Sanitorium, it was not proper for the State to reopen the issue of legality and propriety of appointment of writ petitioner. He is now more than 56 years old, as evidence from his Service Book. 16. In the aforesaid background, I find no good reason to interfere with the judgment and order passed by the learned Single Judge dated 3rd October, 1997 in C.W.J.C. No. 3705 of 1996 (R). 17. There being no merit, the appeal is dismissed. However, there shall be no order, as to costs. Lakshman Uraon, J. 18. I agree.