JUDGMENT R.K. Merathia, J.-Heard the parties. 2. The present Letters Patent Appeal is directed against the judgment of learned Single Judge upholding the order of termination of the appellant. 3. The appellant's case in short is that he was working on daily wages at the additional Primary Health Centre, Boarijor since 1985. Applications were invited through notice on the Notice Board for appointment on the posts of Surveillance worker, a class III post, against which the employment exchange, Godda also forwarded name of the appellant. The appellant was selected and appointed on the said post by a competent authority i.e. Civil Surgeon cum Chief Medical Officer, Godda vide memo no. 1096 dated 31.12.1989 by way of absorption/adius1ment, which was subsequently approved. In course of employment he passed departmental examinations; was transferred and promoted. The Deputy Secretary, Health Department, Patna issued a letter bearing memo no. 155(18) dated 14.2.1991, directing the Civil Surgeon, Godda to terminate the services of 51 persons working on class III/IV posts who were illegally appointed by the then Civil Surgeon. Consequential orders were also passed terminating the services of 51 persons. The appellant and others being aggrieved by the said orders of termination filed a writ petition at Patna High Court being CWJC No. 2078 of 1991 which was disposed of on 3.4.1991. The High Court while quashing the said orders of termination, on the ground of violation of principles of natural justice, gave liberty to the authorities to hold an enquiry in respect of the nature of appointments of the petitioners of the writ petition and if they were found to be illegal in any manner to take any appropriate action in accordance with law. After the said order was passed the said writ petitioners were allowed to join their respective posts. 4. It appears that a show cause notice was issued to the appellant vide memo no. 192 dated 12.6.1998 (Annexure-13) to which he replied on 23.7.1998 (Annexure14). The said show cause notice was issued in course of an enquiry to ascertain the fake and illegal appointments made in the Health Department. 5. My memo no. 446 dated 3.12.1999 issued from the office of the Regional Deputy Director Health Services, Dumka, the Civil Surgeon, Godda was directed to terminate the services of the petitioner and others. The said show cause notice was issued in course of an enquiry to ascertain the fake and illegal appointments made in the Health Department. 5. My memo no. 446 dated 3.12.1999 issued from the office of the Regional Deputy Director Health Services, Dumka, the Civil Surgeon, Godda was directed to terminate the services of the petitioner and others. The said order dated 3.12.1999 was issued pursuant to an enquiry held regarding backdoor/illegal appointments made in the Health Department at large scale. The show cause filed by the petitioner and others were considered and it was also found that several orders of transfer etc. were fake. In the said order the Regional Deputy Director asked for the names of other officers involved in the scandal, so that disciplinary and other proceedings may be started against them. It was also ordered that the salary paid to the petitioner and others should be recovered. Consequent to the said letter dated 3.12.1999. an order of termination the petitioner and others was issued on 29.3.2000. These orders were/are the subject matters of the writ application and this appeal. 6. A counter affidavit was filed in the said writ petition, sworn by Dr. Mrs. Elvina Sheetal, stating inter alia, that the petitioner was appointed on daily wages as IVth grade employee in the State T.B. Training Centre, Patna by Dr. A.M. Mallick, the then Deputy Director of Health Services (T.B.), Bihar, Patna, vide his letter no. 2839) dated 2.12.1989. It is further stated that the Commissioner cum Secretary, Health, Medical, Education & Family Welfare Department, Government of Bihar, Patna had discharged all the E.C.G. (T.B.) staff of Bihar including the petitioner vide his letter no.528 (11) dated Patna/30/4/1993. as per decision taken by the State Level Committee on the report of vigilance and as per direction of Hon'ble High Court. She further stated that the enquiry had been completed after the show cause received from the petitioner. He was appointed by Dr. Mallick as aforesaid and that on the basis of Dr. Mallick's letter he was adjusted on the post of Surveillance Worker and was later on promoted. 7. The appellant challenged the aforesaid orders of termination dated 3.12.1999 and 29.3.2000 by filing the writ petition in question being CWJC No. 1848 of 2001 (R) By judgment dated 20.8.2001, the said writ petition was dismissed. Mallick's letter he was adjusted on the post of Surveillance Worker and was later on promoted. 7. The appellant challenged the aforesaid orders of termination dated 3.12.1999 and 29.3.2000 by filing the writ petition in question being CWJC No. 1848 of 2001 (R) By judgment dated 20.8.2001, the said writ petition was dismissed. The learned Single Judge found that admittedly, no rule/ guideline was issued or framed by the State for straightway adjustment of a daily wage employee against a class III post, without following the provisions of Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution of India. He further held that no procedure was followed and without any advertisement/selection, the petitioner was appointed in violation of Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution of India. However, the authorities were directed by learned Single Judge not to make any recovery from the petitioner in respect to the period he has been paid, having worked. 8. Being aggrieved by dismissal of the writ petition, as aforesaid, the petitioner filed the present appeal. 9. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the appellants vehemently argued that the termination of the appellant, on the ground that his appointment was illegal is bad as he was legally appointed and that the authorities have allowed other similarly situated persons to continue to work which is highly discriminatory. 10. Learned counsel for the appellant referred to several decisions which are of no help in view of the fact that the said, orders of termination, of the persons appointed by Dr. Mallik including the petitioner have been upheld by the Hon'ble Supreme Court. 11. The legality and validity of aforementioned order dt. 30.4.1993 was questioned in batch of writ petitions before the Patna High Court filed by lalan Kumar Singh and others VS. the State of Bihar and analogous cases. The Division Bench of Patna High Court upheld the said order of termination dated 30.4.1993 issued by the Commissioner cum Secretary, Health Medicai Education & Family Welfare Department, Government of Bihar, Patna. The said judgment is reported in 1995 (2) PLJR 309. The matter was taken to the Hon'ble Supreme Court and the said order of termination dated 30.4.1993 was upheld. The said decision is reported in AIR 1997, Supreme Court 1628, Ashwini Kumar & Ors. VS. The State of Bihar. 12. Patna High Court held that massive and illegal appointments were made by Dr. The matter was taken to the Hon'ble Supreme Court and the said order of termination dated 30.4.1993 was upheld. The said decision is reported in AIR 1997, Supreme Court 1628, Ashwini Kumar & Ors. VS. The State of Bihar. 12. Patna High Court held that massive and illegal appointments were made by Dr. Mallick and pursuant to the report of Enquiry Committee constituted in terms of High Courts order, the Government terminated the services of illegal appointees after giving an opportunity to show cause. It further held that appointment by adjustment is un-known to law. The appointments made by Dr. Mallick were illegal and without following statutory Rules. Fraud was practiced in such appointment and the appointees were continued in service for a long time and various meritorious persons had been left in the lurch while appointees had been inducted from backdoor. It is sufficient to notice that as per the counter affidavit filed in the writ petition and the present L.P.A., the petitioner is one of those appointees, appointed by Dr. Mallick through back door by adopting various illegal methods such as adjustment of the petitioner from class IV post to class III post. 13. The judgment of Supreme Court in Ashwini Kumar's case (supra) was delivered by three Judge's Bench on the difference of opinion between two Hon'ble Judges. The Supreme Court held, inter alia, that such an entry of an employee would remain tainted from the very beginning. The Supreme Court took note of the fact that about 6,000 employees were recruited against 2250 class III and class IV posts in absolute violation of established procedure and law. However, the Supreme Court gave liberty to start a fresh exercise for recruiting class III and class IV employees, as per the directions given in the said judgment. 14. From the facts and circumstances, indicated above, the appeal deserves to be dismissed. 15. But this is not the end of the matter. The appellant has brought to our notice, the order passed in CWJC No. 895 of 2000 (P) and has prayed that in terms of the said order, the appellant should be allowed to continue in service. 16. From the facts and circumstances, indicated above, the appeal deserves to be dismissed. 15. But this is not the end of the matter. The appellant has brought to our notice, the order passed in CWJC No. 895 of 2000 (P) and has prayed that in terms of the said order, the appellant should be allowed to continue in service. 16. The appellant along with others filed writ petition at Patna High Court being CWJC No. 895 of 2000 (P), challenging the same order dated 3.12.1999, challenged in the present writ petition/L.P.A. It is further stated that as the said writ petition filed at Patna, was not taken up, and he was undergoing hardship, he filed the present writ petition in Jharkhand High Court with an undertaking that after the said writ petition is transferred to this Court, he will withdraw his name from the said writ petition. 17. It is pointed out that the appellant, accordingly, did not instruct his counsel when the said writ petition was taken up after transfer from Patna High Court to Jharkhand High Court. It is also pointed out that the said writ petition i.e. CWJC No. 895 of 2000 (P) Daniel Hansda & Others VS. The State of Jharkhand & Others was disposed of by order dated 9.1.2003, quashing the order of termination dated 3.12.1999. 18. It may be noticed here that the same order dated 3.12.1999 was in challenge in the said CWJC No. 895 of 2000 (P) and in CWJC No. 1848 of 2001 against which the present appeal has been preferred. In CWJC No. 895 of 2000 (P), the said order of termination dated 3.12.1999 has been set aside whereas in CWJC No. 1848 of 2001 the same has been upheld. 19. It appears that on the baiss of the counter affidavit, that was filed by the said Dr. Mrs. Elvina Sheetal in the said CWJC No. 895 of 2000, the order of termination dated 3.12.1999 was quashed. As already noticed above, that she herself filed a counter affidavit in CWJC No. 895 of 2000 (P) on 7.1.2003. It is useful to quote, relevant portion of the said affidavit which are as follows : '8 That it is relevant to mention here that large number of persons were appointed illegally in the Health department ignoring the due process of law as such the Chief Secretary, Govt. It is useful to quote, relevant portion of the said affidavit which are as follows : '8 That it is relevant to mention here that large number of persons were appointed illegally in the Health department ignoring the due process of law as such the Chief Secretary, Govt. of Bihar vide letter dated 19.6.1999 directed to enquire into the matter and take appropriate action so far appointment made after 1.1.1980. It is further submitted that accordingly the Divisional Commissioner, Santhal Pargana, Dumka issued direction upon the Deputy Commissioner vide letter dated 4th July, 2091. Photo copy of the letter dated 4.7.2001 is annexed herewith and marked as 9. That accordingly the Deputy Commissioner constituted two member committee i.e. Additional Collector, Godda and Civil Surgeon, Godda vide letter dated 12.7.2001 and vide memo no. 593 dated 11.8.2001 the Deputy Commissioner demanded the report on five points with regard to appointment. A photo copy of the letter dated 12.7.2001 and 11.8.2001 are annexed herewith and marked as Annexure-E and F respectively. 10. That the answering respondents most humbly and respectfully submits that since the matter has to be required from long back i.e. 1980 which relates with different districts hence it will take time. 11. That during pendency of the Writ Petition one of the petitioner filed representation before the R.D.D. Health, Santhal Pargana, Dumka for reconsideration of matter in which it is observed that since the matter is pending before the Hon'ble Court hence further action will be taken after disposal of Writ Petition. A photo copy of 30.4.2002 is annexed herewith and marked as Annexure-G. 12. That the answering respondents seek permission to give parawise reply as and when required by this Hon'ble Court." 20. Dr. Mrs. Elvina Sheetal was Civil Surgeon, Godda at the relevant time and she knew well about the termination of illegal appointees by the Government. She received and replied several correspondences regarding this scandal. But she did not State the relevant facts in the counter affidavit filed in CWJC No. 895 of 2000 (P) and stated irrelevant facts therein. 21. Dr. Mrs. Elvina Sheetal was Civil Surgeon, Godda at the relevant time and she knew well about the termination of illegal appointees by the Government. She received and replied several correspondences regarding this scandal. But she did not State the relevant facts in the counter affidavit filed in CWJC No. 895 of 2000 (P) and stated irrelevant facts therein. 21. It appears that the Divisional Commissioner, Santhal Pargana, Dumka issued direction to the Deputy Commissioner vide letter dated 4th July, 2001 pursuant to a letter dated 19th June, 1999, issued by the Chief Secretary, Government of Bihar in the matter of taking action against the erring officers, involved in the aforesaid scandal of illegal appointments in the Health Department. It is presumed that the Health Department who was party in the said judgment of Patna High Court, affirmed by Supreme Court in the case of Ashwini Kumar (supra) knew about the said judgments of High Court and Supreme Court, whereby the order of termination dated 30.4.1993 was upheld. Therefore, the said enquiry, as stated in the counter affidavit in CWJC No. 895 of 2000 (P), must be for identifying the erring officers and taking action against them and in that process, if it is found that the illegal appointees are continuing, they should also be terminated after issuing show cause notice. There is no reason why a further enquiry should be held with regard to those illegal appointees, whose order of termination dated 30.4.1993 was upheld up to Supreme Court. This order of termination dated 30.4.1993 is the basis for issuing consequential orders dated 3.12.1999 and 29.3.2000 issued in this case. 22. From the facts and circumstances, noticed above, it prima facie appears, Dr. Mrs. Elvina Sheetal is guilty of misleading this Court for the reasons best known to her. 23. The Counsel for appellant has also strenuously argued that other persons similarly situated like the petitioner are allowed to continue and therefore, the appellant may also be allowed to continue in service. 24. This is a settled law that the Court cannot prepetuate illegality. However, if the statements of the appellant is correct that other persons similarly situated are continuing to work, the same is a serious matter and must be looked into by the Government immediately. 24. This is a settled law that the Court cannot prepetuate illegality. However, if the statements of the appellant is correct that other persons similarly situated are continuing to work, the same is a serious matter and must be looked into by the Government immediately. If it is found that the illegal appointees are still continuing in service, in spite' of the fact that the termination of such employees has been upheld up to Supreme Court, they should be dealt with in similar fashion like the petitioner and action should be taken against the erring officers without any delay. 25. It is not known for whose benefit, the order of termination dated 30.4.1993 was given effect to after seven years so far as petitioner and some others are concerned. It is also surprising that other persons similarly situated are said to be continuing in spite of the said judgment of the Supreme Court. 26. Let a copy of the judgment be sent to the Chief Secretary, Government of Jharkhand and Secretary, Department of Health, Medical Examination and Family Welfare, Government of Jharkhand for taking appropriate action against the erring officers and illegal appointees in accordance with law. 27. In the result this appeal is dismissed with the aforesaid observations and directions, and order of Learned Single Judge is confirmed.