R. B. MISRA, J. Heard Sri R. K. Srivastava, learned Counsel for the petitioner and Sri S. S. Sharma, learned Standing Counsel for the State respondents. With the consent of learned Counsels for the parties this writ petition is decided finally at this stage in view of the second proviso to Rule 2 of Chapter XXII of the Allahabad High Court Rules, 1952. 2. In this petition prayer has been made for quashing the order dated 17-6-1991 passed by the Chief Medical Officer, Deoria (Annexure-6 to the writ petition), whereby the petitioners service was terminated under the U. P. Temporary Government Servant (Termination of Service) Rules, 1975. 3. According to the petitioner, he has appointed on ad hoc basis to the post of Ward Boy (Class-IV post) by the Chief Medical Officer, Deoria on 24-12-1986 and was posted at Rajkiya Homeopathic Hospital,, Bansgaon, District Deoria. The appointment order is enclosed as Annexure-1 to the writ petition. In pursuance thereof the petitioner was medically examined by Chief Medical Officer on 26-12-1986 and the petitioner joined the duty in the office of the Deputy Chief Medical Officer, IInd, Deoria on 26-12- 1986 (Annexure-3 to the writ petition ). According to the petitioner, he was directed by the Deputy Chief Medical Officer, Deoria by its letter dated 26/27-12-1986 to join at Rajkiya Homeopathic Hospital, Ahirauli, Deoria. According to the petitioner his work and performance was excellent and no adverse entry was ever communicated to him and after joining at Rajkiya Homeopathic Hospital Bansgaon, District Deoria the petitioner was regularly working without any break till the termination order was passed on 17-6-1991. According to the petitioner, he was deployed in General Election Duty of year 1991 and elections held in Deoria district on 15-6-1991, where the certificate by the District Magistrate, Deoria was issued to him on 25-6-1991. According to the petitioner he has continuously worked for more than three years, as such, he was entitled for regularisation, however, instead of regularising his service the Chief Medical Officer, Deoria passed the impugned order terminating the service of the petitioner, whereas several other juniors to him have been retained in the service but the petitioner without any rhyme and reason has been discriminated. 4. 4. When the present writ petition was filed, this Court was pleased to on 25-7-1991 pass an interim order directing that if any Ward Boy junior to the petitioner is continuing in Government Homeopathic Hospital, Bansgaon, Deoria the petitioners service shall not be deemed to have been terminated pursuant to the order dated 17-6-1991 impugned in the present writ petition. 5. According to the petitioner by virtue of this interim order the petitioner is continuing in service and the post, on which he was working has not been abolished and juniors to the petitioner have been retained in service and the petitioners service mala fidely has been terminated without observing the principle of natural justice and in derogation to the provisions of Article 311 of the Constitution. 6. The counter-affidavit has been filed. In para 4 of the same it was indicated that in the month of August, 1990 it came into light that there are many surplus staff in the category of Class III and Class IV employees in Medical Health and Family Welfare Department in the District Deoria. In this regard the Additional Director Medical Health and Family Welfare, Gorakhpur wrote a letter to the Chief Medical Officer Deoria on 7-11-1990 with direction that the appointment and service record of all the Class III and Class IV employees be verified. According to para 5 of the counter-affidavit, in pursuance of aforesaid letter the Chief Medical Officer, Deoria issued directions to all the Deputy Chief Medical Officer, Deoria as well as other subordinate officers by its letter dated 14-11-1990 and 20-11-1990, in which it was specifically pointed out that large number of employees, who are drawing salary on the basis of forged appointment letter/ transfer order, their matter be enquired into and the employee be asked no produce the original records so that correct facts may be verified. According to paras 6, 7, 8 and 9 of the counter-affidavit, during verification of service records of Class-III and Class-IV employees, it was revealed that the several employees were working in the Medical Health and Family Welfare Department in District Deoria without any appointment letter issued in their favour. These employees joined the service on the basis of forged transfer order though they were not working on the place from which they have been shown to have been transferred. These employees joined the service on the basis of forged transfer order though they were not working on the place from which they have been shown to have been transferred. The First Information Reports have been lodged against such employees and they have been stopped from working. It was also found that several employees have joined the services and obtained the appointment letter as Class-III and Class-IV employee under the U. P. Recruitment of Dependants Government Servant (Dying in Harness) Rules, 1974 by submitting forged certificate although their father or mother were not working in the department. The First Information Reports were lodged against such employees and their appointments were cancelled. It was also found that several employees were appointed/promoted to the post of Basic Health Worker (Male) and vaccinator without any technical qualification and even without having minimum qualification i. e. , High School (Science) and the services of the such employees were terminated/reverted, as the case may be. It was further stated that the Class-III employees on the post of lower divisional clerk were appointed without having knowledge of typing word. It was found that several employees were appointed without recommendation of selection committee and without following the procedure for selection. The services of such employees were also terminated, the then Chief Medical Officer, Dr. Balbir Singh and one establishment clerk Mr. Kaushal Kishore Srivastava have been suspended and departmental proceeding is going on against these officials. According to para 10 of the counter-affidavit, the appointment of the petitioner as Class-IV employee was full of forgery. The petitioner was never employed in Malaria Department but while appointment the petitioner a colour has been given as if the petitioner was working in Malaria Department. The recommendation stated in the appointment letter by the District Malaria Adhikari is incorrect and false. The petitioner was appointed without any selection from the selection committee and without following the procedure for selection without any vacant post of Class-IV employee in Rajkiya Homeopathic Hospital, Bansgaon. The posting of the petitioner was made by the Deputy Chief Medical Officer (II), Deoria and the petitioner was posted at Rajkiya Homeopathic Hospital, Ahiraulidan, Deoria by its letter dated 26/27-12-1986 (Annexure-IV to the writ petition ). The posting of the petitioner was made by the Deputy Chief Medical Officer (II), Deoria and the petitioner was posted at Rajkiya Homeopathic Hospital, Ahiraulidan, Deoria by its letter dated 26/27-12-1986 (Annexure-IV to the writ petition ). The letter dated 26/27-12-1986 was endorsed to the Chief Medical Officer but the copy of the letter dated 26/27-12-1986 issued by the Deputy Chief Medial Officer, Deoria is not available in the office of the Chief Medical Officer, Deoria. The posting of the petitioner from Bansgaon to Ahiraulidan was done without permission of the Chief Medical Officer, Deoria. According to para 15 of the counter-affidavit, since the petitioner was appointed in illegal manner without following any selection, therefore, other is no occasion for the petitioner to say that juniors to him are still in service. It was further submitted that actions taken against those employees, who have been appointed in illegal manner, is perfectly just and legal in the eyes of law. 7. According to the petitioner,as contended in para 4 of the rejoinder-affidavit, some other employees have obtained forged appointment letter and joined their duties and whereas the petitioner was appointed by duly constituted selection committee and was given appointment letter dated 24-12-1986. In para 9 of the rejoinder-affidavit it has been reiterated that the petitioner has been appointed by following procedure and by duly constituted committee and the petitioner was not affording opportunity of hearing before termination of service. 8. In para 9 of the rejoinder-affidavit it has been reiterated that the petitioner has been appointed by following procedure and by duly constituted committee and the petitioner was not affording opportunity of hearing before termination of service. 8. After hearing the learned Counsels for the parties, going through the facts stated in the writ petition as well as in the respective affidavits and also taking into consideration the material available on records,this Court on 8-8-2003 directed the District Judge, Deoria to hold an inquiry into the matter who after having inquiry submitted his report dated 22-10-2003, which reads as under : "honble the High Court of Judicature of Allahabad directed District Judge, Deoria, vide its order dated 8- 8-2003, passed in Civil Miscellaneous Writ Petition No. 18960/1991, Prem Shanker v. State of U. P. , to enquire from the Director General, Medical Health, U. P. Additional Director, General, Medical Health, Chief Medical Officer, Deputy Chief Medical Officer of Deoria and different authorities of Malaria Department of Deoria or from any of the administrative authorities of State of any department, with the help of the Superintendent of Police, as to whether the forged appointment letters were procured by the petitioner out of illegal, irregular and deep-rooted corruption involved in the said selection process in the appointment of Class-III and Class-IV employees in district Deoria and the petitioners case is referable to that episode for procuring the appointment by foul means. (2) I wrote to the Director General, Medical Health, U. P. , but no reply was given by him. I then enquired the matter from the Chief Medical Officer, Deoria, District Magistrate, Deoria and took the help of the Superintendent of Police, Deoria, in this connection. I recorded the statement of the petitioner, Sri Prem Shanker, in Civil Misc. Writ Petition No. 18960/1991, petitioner, Raj Brind Singh, in Civil Misc. Writ Petition No. 18961/1991, Sri Nand Kishore Jais, District Homeopathic Officer, District Kushinagar. Sri Namo Narain Pandey, Junior Clerk in the Office of C. M. O. , Deoria and Sri Sudama Singh, Clerk in District Womens Hospital, Deoria. I also sent several summons to Dr. Balbir Singh, the then C. M. O. , Deoria and Sri Kaushal Kishore Srivastava, the then clerk attached to the office of C. M. O. , Deoria, but none of them appeared, although Dr. I also sent several summons to Dr. Balbir Singh, the then C. M. O. , Deoria and Sri Kaushal Kishore Srivastava, the then clerk attached to the office of C. M. O. , Deoria, but none of them appeared, although Dr. Balbir Singh the then C. M. O. , Deoria, had sent an Advocate, Sri Shambhu Nath Singh, to watch the proceeding. I directed Sri Shambhu Nath Singh,advocate, also in this connection that Dr. Balbir Singh should appear before me. The said Advocate once assured me that he would produce Dr. Balbir Singh before me but, later on, he resiled from the said assurance. (3) 39 Criminal Cases are pending against Dr. Balbir Singh and Sri Kaushal Kishore Srivastava aforesaid for the offences punishable under Sections 409, 420, 467, 468, 471 and 120-B, IPC. A perusal of the order-sheets of these files reveals that in all these cases as well Dr. Balbir Singh and Sri Kaushal Kishore Srivastava are not appearing and the Court has issued non-bailable warrant against them. (4) Petitioner Prem Shanker has appeared before me, and has stated that he was appointed in Health Department, Deoria, on 26-12-1986, in the pay scale of Rs. 305-390. The said order of the then C. M. O. Dr. Balbir Singh was got served upon him by Sri Kaushal Kishore Srivastava, the then clerk in the office of C. M. O. , Deoria. He has further stated that he cannot say whether there was any vacancy, or not, in the Health Department, Deoria or any vacancy had been advertised, or not. He has further stated that he came to know that there were some vacancies in the Health Department, and prior to his appointment in question, he was employed on daily wages in the Malaria Deptt. for spraying. He wrote the application with his own hand and gave it in the office of the C. M. O. , Deoria. He was posted in Homeopathic Hospital in village Ahirauli Dan and remained there posted as such till the end of 1987. He got the dismissal order in the year 1991. There being no vacancy in Bansgaon, he was transferred to Ahirauli Dan. He was posted in Homeopathic Hospital in village Ahirauli Dan and remained there posted as such till the end of 1987. He got the dismissal order in the year 1991. There being no vacancy in Bansgaon, he was transferred to Ahirauli Dan. He does not know whether at the time the order removing him from service was passed, any person junior to him was retained in service and was not removed from service and whether any such person is still in service, or not. He does not know as to whether, or not, the then clerk Sri Kaushal Kishore Srivastava and the then C. M. O. , Dr. Balbir Singh had issued forged appointment letters. He also does not know as to whether, or not, the said Sri Kaushal Kishore Srivastava and Dr. Balbir Singh were suspended in connection with issue of forged appointment letters, or whether there are criminal cases pending, or not, against them in this connection. (5) Petitioner Raj Brind Singh was also examined who was also appointed in the Medical Health Department by Dr. Balbir Singh, the then C. M. O. , Deoria and Sri Kaushal Kishore Srivastava, the then clerk in the office of the C. M. O. , Deoria. He has also stated the same thing in his statement. (6) The present C. M. O. , Deoria has furnished a list of 11 employees, out of which two were irregularly appointed by the then C. M. O. , Dr. Balbir Singh and the remaining nine employees were given forged appointment letters. The said list is enclosed herewith. It is stated in the list that the mother of Sri Manoj Kumar Upadhyaya was employed in Education Department but he was appointed under The U. P. Recruitment of Dependents of Government Servants Dying in Harness Rules, 1974 in the Medical Health Department, which could not have been made. Barister Singh, Vaccinator, who has died was also appointed without any qualification. The rest nine candidates were appointed and forged appointment letters were given to them. This report has been given by the C. M. O. , Deoria, on 12-9-2003. Another list of 42 candidates has also been furnished by the C. M. O. , Deoria, about which it can be said that these employees too were appointed by forged method by the then C. M. O. , Dr. Balbir Singh and his clerk, Sri Kaushal Kishore Srivastava. Another list of 42 candidates has also been furnished by the C. M. O. , Deoria, about which it can be said that these employees too were appointed by forged method by the then C. M. O. , Dr. Balbir Singh and his clerk, Sri Kaushal Kishore Srivastava. (7) Witness Nand Kishore Jaish, District Homeopathic Officer, District Kushinagar, has stated that he is working as such for the last two years in Kushinagar and has dealt with the file of petitioner Raj Brind Singh who prior to his selection promotion, was employed on daily wages in Malaria Department for spraying medicine, on 14-11-1986, by the then C. M. O. , and was posted at Government Homeopathic Hospital, Bankata. At that time District Kushinagar was a part of District Deoria, Homeopathic Department was under the charge of C. M. O. , Deoria at that time, but with a separate directorate, which is still separate. Appointments in Homeopathic Department are made from the District level. It was earlier done by C. M. O. and now it is being done by District Homeopathic Officer. Petitioner Raj Brind Singh was selected by way of promotion. If he was promoted by Malaria Department then he ought to have been appointed in the Malaria Department itself. In this way, his appointment was illegal. Besides it, the said appointment was not done by the Selection Committee, nor any vacancy had been advertised. (8) Sri Namo Narain Pandey is a junior clerk of the office of C. M. O. Deoria, dealing with establishment matters. He has stated that petitioners Raj Brind and Prem Shanker were respectively appointed on 14- 11-1986 and 24-12-1986 and they both were removed from service vide order dated 17-6-1991. He has specifically named the persons who were removed from service. He has stated that some employees were illegally appointed who were removed from service. A perusal of the enquiry file shows that 39 criminal cases are pending against Dr. Balbir Singh, the then C. M. O. , Deoria and Sri Kaushal Kishore Srivastava, the then clerk in the office of C. M. O. , Deoria for issue of forged appointment letters and that the said Dr. Balbir Singh and Sri Kaushal Kishore Srivastava are not appearing in any of these cases and non-bailable warrant and process under Sections 82-83 Cr. P. C. , are going on against them. Balbir Singh and Sri Kaushal Kishore Srivastava are not appearing in any of these cases and non-bailable warrant and process under Sections 82-83 Cr. P. C. , are going on against them. During this enquiry also, I tried to procure the attendance of Dr. Balbir Singh and the clerk Sri Kaushal Kishore Srivastava but inspite of my best efforts, their attendance could be procured. It is to be mentioned that one Sri Shambhu Nath Singh, Advocate, was sent by Dr. Balbir Singh during the enquiry before me only to watch the proceeding. The said Sri Shambhunath Singh was introduced to me by the D. G. C. (Criminal) Sri Ram Naresh Mani Tripathi. The appointment file of petitioner Prem Shanker is missing from the officer of C. M. O. , Deoria and the clerk has given statement that the said file was not received by him, and it is missing from the office of C. M. O. , Deoria. The file of Raj Brind Singh was found in the office of C. M. O. Sri Raj Brind Singh gave an application without date to the then C. M. O. , Deoria, alleging that he had come to know from reliable sources that there were some vacancies in Class-IV in his (C. M. Os.) office, that his educational qualification was High School and that he was a poor man, so he should be appointed in Class-IV establishment. A photostat copy of the said application has been filed in the enquiry. The second application of Raj Brind Singh is also without date, addressed to C. M. O. , Deoria through proper channel, wherein it is alleged that he was working on daily wages that his educational qualification was High School that he was registered with the Employment Exchange Office, Deoria, that he was a poor man and that if there be any vacancy in Class-IV establishment, he should be appointed and promoted to any post,such as Sweeper-cum-Chowkidar. This application was forwarded by District Malaria Officer, Deoria, on 20-10-1986. A perusal of the file shows that Sri Kaushal Kishore Srivastava made an endorsement on the application, viz. , "c. M. O. /sir, Be pleased to peruse and if agreed, promotion on a Class-IV post be made. " A copy of the said application is enclosed herewith. Dr. Balbir Singh made the endorsement. "yes" thereon and beneath this endorsement, there is the signature of Dr. , "c. M. O. /sir, Be pleased to peruse and if agreed, promotion on a Class-IV post be made. " A copy of the said application is enclosed herewith. Dr. Balbir Singh made the endorsement. "yes" thereon and beneath this endorsement, there is the signature of Dr. Balbir Singh dated 12-11-1986. It is to be mentioned that no notice of any vacancy was pasted on the notice board. Neither any selection committee was constituted for appointment of Class-IV employees which is in force in the district since 1975 nor any roster system was followed nor any interview or written test took place for the selection of the candidates. So, this can be said that there were typed copies with Sri Kaushal Kishore Srivastava who took the signatures of the applicants thereon and by illegal means got the approval of the then C. M. O. , Dr. Balbir Singh. When there was no vacancy in the Health Department or the Malaria Department, no person on daily wages could have been appointed on regular basis in the Malaria Department, nor could be promoted. So, this order for promotion is also an illegal order. Thirdly,the petitioners could not have been posted elsewhere except Malaria Department, but they were sent in Health Department. So, the appointment orders of these two employees were the result of the deep-rooted conspiracy of these two employees, Dr. Balbir Singh and clerk Sri Kaushal Kishore Srivastava and by illegal means, the petitioners were appointed in the Health Deptt. by Dr. Balbir Singh, the then C. M. O. , Deoria. It is to be mentioned that when the higher authorities came to know about these illegal appointments,then order for removal from service of these employees were passed, as they had got forged appointment letters in collusion with Dr. Balbir Singh and clerk Sri Kaushal Kishore Srivastava. The appointment of the petitioners was the outcome of a deep-rooted conspiracy, which had been made without following the rules of appointment. They could not have been promoted to Class-IV post. They could be appointed after advertising the vacancies on the notice board and after making a selection committee and after fixing a date for interview or written test and the recommendation of the selection committee for appointment should have been obtained. They could not have been promoted to Class-IV post. They could be appointed after advertising the vacancies on the notice board and after making a selection committee and after fixing a date for interview or written test and the recommendation of the selection committee for appointment should have been obtained. No process was followed in the appointment of these two employees alongwith other 39 candidates for which cases are pending in the Court of C. J. M. , Deoria. No list was prepared of the selected candidates and illegal appointments were given to these employees by the then C. M. O. , Dr. Balbir Singh and his clerk Sri Kaushal Kishore Srivastava as a back-door entry. So, it is to be submitted that Dr. Balbir Singh, the then C. M. O. , Deoria and his clerk Sri Kaushal Kishore Srivastava were later on suspended after a departmental enquiry and the services of the candidates who were given forged appointment out of a deep-rooted conspiracy by Dr. Balbir Singh and Kaushal Kishore Srivastava were terminated by the subsequent orders. It is to be mentioned that it has been alleged by these petitioners in their writ petitions that juniors to them are working in the Medical Health Department, which is incorrect. All the illegal appointments made by Dr. Balbir Singh in collusion with his clerk Sri Kaushal Kishore Srivastava and the petitioners have been ordered to be terminated and no one is working at present. (9) Thus, during this enquiry, I found that the appointments of these petitioners alongwith other petitioners were the outcome of deep-rooted conspiracy between the petitioners and other persons and Dr. Balbir Singh, the then C. M. O. , Deoria and Kaushal Kishore Srivastava, clerk, with a motive of deep-rooted corruption in the appointment of these persons and 39 criminal cases are pending against Dr. Balbir Singh and Kaushal Kishore Srivastava aforesaid for the offences punishable under Sections 409, 420, 467, 468, 471 and 120-B IPC. Thus, the enquiry report is submitted for kind perusal of the Honble High Court. October 22, 2003 Sd/-Illegible (Dhani Ram) District Judge, Deoria. " 9. According to the respondents in view of AIR 2001 (SC) 102 : JT 2000 Suppl. Thus, the enquiry report is submitted for kind perusal of the Honble High Court. October 22, 2003 Sd/-Illegible (Dhani Ram) District Judge, Deoria. " 9. According to the respondents in view of AIR 2001 (SC) 102 : JT 2000 Suppl. 2 SC 417, Nazira Begum Lashkar and others v. State of Assam and others, where in reference to Rule 3 of Assam Elementary Education (Provincilisation) Rules, 1977 the appointment of the assistant teachers made de horse the statutory rules without any advertisement for calling the applications and without any proper constitution of selection committee and without any interview cancelled after going notice to the appointees, were held not illegal by the Supreme Court as such appointments did neither confer any right on the appointee nor any such appointee could claim any equitable relief from any Court as the appointments stood annulled hardly after six months from the date of appointments, therefore, no direction for adjustment of equities in favour of the appointees were to be given. In the case of Nazira Begum Lashkar (supra) the appointment of assistant teachers of Primary Schools made de horse the norms, rules etc. were cancelled after serving them the show-cause notice, whereas in the present case the impugned order dated 18-10-1985 apparently appears to be an order simplicitor, but in the background the basis of such order required notice to be given to the petitioner. Learned Counsel for the respondents has also submitted that in view of 2002 (1) LBESR 977 (All) : 2002 All LJ 1216, Dharmendra Kumar Tiwari v. State of U. P. and others, the temporary appointee has no right to continue even if the post was existing and this Court in Dharmendra Kumar Tiwari (supra) following 1991 (1) SCC 691 ; State of U. P. v. Kaushal Kishore, has held that : "there is no such legal principle that a temporary employee has a right to continue on the post till a regularly selected candidate is available for that post. Rather the legal position is just the reverse, namely that a temporary employee has no right to continue even if the post continues to exist. An ad hoc appointee is also a temporary appointee. The expression `temporary appointee is a general expression under which there are several sub-categories, e. g. , casual appointee, daily wage appointee, ad hoc appointee and even a probationer. An ad hoc appointee is also a temporary appointee. The expression `temporary appointee is a general expression under which there are several sub-categories, e. g. , casual appointee, daily wage appointee, ad hoc appointee and even a probationer. All such sub-categories fall within the general category of a temporary appointee, as contrasted to a permanent appointee. The legal position is that a temporary appointee has no right to the post and it is not correct to say that a temporary appointee has a right to continue till a regularly selected candidate is available for the post. 1991 AIR SCW 793 Foll. " 10. It is also relevant to note that in AIR 1994 SC 2166 , Krishan Yadav and another v. State of Haryana and others, where the selection of Taxation Inspectors was cancelled because the selection process was stinking, conceived in fraud and delivered in deceit, therefore, cancellation of the entire selection was upheld and the plea of innocence of selectees was found not tenable and selectees were not required to repay salary and perks. It was observed in Krishan Yadav (supra) as below : "as regards the selection made without interview, fake and ghost interviews, tempering with the final records fabricating documents, forgery, an inference that all was motivated by extraneous considerations can be drawn. The entire selection thus is arbitrary and is liable to be set aside. The plea that innocent candidates should not be penalised for the misdeeds of others in not applicable to such cases. The effect of setting aside the selection would mean the selectees will have no right to go to the office. Normally they will have to repay the entire salary and perks which they have received from the said office. The Court however refused to order repayment in this case. " 11. The effect of setting aside the selection would mean the selectees will have no right to go to the office. Normally they will have to repay the entire salary and perks which they have received from the said office. The Court however refused to order repayment in this case. " 11. Learned standing Counsel has placed reliance on AIR 1997 SC 1629 : JT 1997 (1) SC 243 : 1997 (2) SCC 1 , Ashwani Kumar and others v. State of Bihar and others, where the recruitment in T. B. Eradication Programme of State Government to the post of Class-III and Class-IV employee made in derogation to the prescribed procedure for the recruitment laid down by the State Government and without sanctioned post backed by financial budget approval was found ex facie illegal and not binding on the State Government and was found not contradictory to the provisions of Article 16 of the Constitution and the employees so recruited and for regularisation in service were treated to be illegal in respect of their entry into service and as a total disregard to recruitment rules or being not an existing vacancy, as such no case of regularisation was possible. The Supreme Court in Ashwani Kumar (supra) observed as below : " (16) So far as the principles of natural justice are concerned it has to be stated at the outset that principles of natural justice cannot be subjected to any strait-jacket formula. They will vary from case to case, from circumstance to circumstance and from situation to situation. Here is a case in which 6000 employees were found squatting in the Tuberculosis Scheme controlled and monitored by Dr. Mallick for the entire State of Bihar and there was no budgetary sanction for defraying their expenditure. At least out of 6000 employees as seen earlier 3750 were totally unauthorised and were squatting against non-existing vacancies. A grave situation had arisen which required immediate action for clearing the stables and for eradicating the evil effects of these vitiated recruitments so that the Tuberculosis Eradication Scheme could be put on a sound footing. xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx Whatever was submitted by the concerned employees was taken into consideration and then the committee came to a firm decision to the effect that all these appointments made by Dr. xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx Whatever was submitted by the concerned employees was taken into consideration and then the committee came to a firm decision to the effect that all these appointments made by Dr. Mallick were vitiated from the inception and were required to be set aside and that is how the impugned termination orders were passed against the appellants. On the facts of these cases, therefore, it cannot be said that principles of natural justice were violated or full opportunity was not given to the concerned employees to have their say in the matter before their appointments were recalled and terminated. Point No. 2 is, therefore, answered in the negative. " " (17) The initial entry of the employees is itself unauthorised being not against sanctioned vacancies nor was Dr. Mallick entrusted with the power of creating vacancies or posts for the schemes under the Tuberculosis Eradication Programme. Consequently the termination of the services of all these appellants cannot be found fault with. Nor any relief as claimed by them of reinstatement with continued service can be made available to them. " 12. In the case of Krishna Yadav (supra), the Supreme Court had set aside the entire selection and the appointment after finding the whole examination and interview having termed to be a fraud. There relevant paras 20 and 21 of the judgment rendered in the said case are reproduced below : " (20) It is highly regrettable that the holders of public officers both big and small have forgotten that the offices entrusted to them are sacred trust. Such offices are meant for use and not abuse. From a Minister to a menial every one has been dishonest to gain undue advantages. The whole examination and the interview have turned out to be farcial exhibiting base character of those who have been responsible for this sordid episode. It shocks our conscience to come across such a systematic fraud. It is somewhat surprising that High Court should have taken the path of least resistance stating in view of the destruction of records, it was helpless. It should have helped itself. Law is not that powerless. " " (21) In the above circumstances, what are we to do? The only proper course open to us is to set aside the entire selection. The peal was made that innocent candidates should not be penalised for the misdeeds of others. It should have helped itself. Law is not that powerless. " " (21) In the above circumstances, what are we to do? The only proper course open to us is to set aside the entire selection. The peal was made that innocent candidates should not be penalised for the misdeeds of others. We are unable to accept this argument. When, the entire selection is stinking, conceived in fraud and delivered in deceit, individual innocence has no place as "fraud unravels everything". To put it in other words, the entire selection is arbitrary. It is that which is faulted and not the individual candidates. Accordingly, we hereby set aside the selection of Taxation Inspectors. " 13. In (1996)7 Supreme Court Cases 118, State of M. P. and others v. Shyama Pardi and others, the Supreme Court has held that the question of violation of principle of natural justice does not arise in a case where the persons are not possessing the pre-requisite qualifications prescribed by the statutory rules. In para 5 of the said judgment, the Supreme Court has held as under : " (5) It is now an admitted fact across the bar that the respondents had not possessed the pre-requisite qualification, namely 10 + 2 with Physics, Chemistry and Biology as subjects. The rules specifically provide that qualification as a condition for appointment to the post of ANM. Since prescribed qualifications had not been satisfied, the initial selection to undergo training is per se illegal. Later appointments thereof are in violation of the statutory rules. The Tribunal, therefore, was not right in directing the reinstatement of the respondents. The question or violation of the principles of natural justice does not arise. The ratio of Shrawan Kumar Jha v. State of Bihar, strongly relied on, has no application to the facts of this case. That was a case where the appellants possessed initial qualifications but they did not undergo the training. Since the appointment was set aside on the ground of want of training, this Court interfered with, directed the Government to reinstate them into service and further directed them to send the appellants therein for training. " 2 14. That was a case where the appellants possessed initial qualifications but they did not undergo the training. Since the appointment was set aside on the ground of want of training, this Court interfered with, directed the Government to reinstate them into service and further directed them to send the appellants therein for training. " 2 14. In 1997 (1) LBESR 113 (SC) : JT 1996 (8) SC 510, Hanuman Prasad and others v. Union of India and another, the Supreme Court has held that if the authorities have taken the decision on the basis of the report submitted by the investigating agency, containing proof in support of the allegations of malpractice committed in writing the examination no prior opportunity need be given in such cases. In para 4 of the said judgment, the Supreme Court has held as under : " (4) It is then contended that though the selected candidates have no vested right,they had got a legitimate expectation for appointment when they were selected for being appointed. They should be given prior opportunity and also know the reasons for cancellation. In support of this connection, he placed reliance on paragraph 8 of the judgment of this Court in Asha Kaul and another v. State of Jammu and Kashmir and others, JT 1993 (2) SC 688. It is unexceptionable that when duly constituted selection committee makes recommendation for appointment of the selected candidates the candidates do not get any vested right or legitimate expectation until they are given appointment according to the rules, they have a chance to be appointed as have been selected by the recruitment agency. In that case, the Government had cancelled the select list without any reasons. This Court has laid the above rule in that backdrop. The ratio therein has no application for the reason that after the perusal of the report submitted by the investigating agency,the competent authority had cancelled the selection so that the regular and proper examination could be conducted giving opportunity to every one in a fair manner. No prior opportunity need be given in the case of mass copying. It is not the case where a named candidate committed copying. Accordingly, we do not find any illegality in the order passed by the Tribunal. " 15. In 1990 (4) SCC 633 , U. P. Junior Doctors Action Committee v. Dr. No prior opportunity need be given in the case of mass copying. It is not the case where a named candidate committed copying. Accordingly, we do not find any illegality in the order passed by the Tribunal. " 15. In 1990 (4) SCC 633 , U. P. Junior Doctors Action Committee v. Dr. B. Sheetal Nandwani and others, where for getting admission in post graduate course a fake judgment of one bench of High Court, Allahabad aborting entrance examination was produced, pursuant to which an order was issued by an another bench of the High Court Allahabad (Lucknow Bench) thereby cancelling the examination of entrance to P. G. course and directing State Government to grant admission on the basis of M. B. B. S. results, such bogus judgment of earlier bench was found not existent therefore, order issued pursuant thereto having been made on the basis of misrepresentation was set aside. The Supreme Court in para 5 of B. Sheetal Nandwani (supra) has observed as below : " (5) We are satisfied that there is a deep-seated, conspiracy, which brought about the fake order from Allahabad, the principal seal of the High Court and on the basis thereof a subsequent direction has been obtained from the Lucknow Bench of the same High Court. The first order being non-existent has to be declared to be a bogus one. The second order made on the basis of the first order has to be set aside as having been made on the basis of misrepresentation. We are alive to the situation that the persons who have been taken admission on the basis of the MBBS results are not before us. The circumstances in which such benefit has been taken by the candidates concerned do not justify attraction of the application of rules of natural justice of being provided an opportunity to be heard. " 3 16. The selection process must be fair and impartial in view of judgment in AIR 1992 SC 1806 , para 6, National Institute of Mental Health v. Dr. K. Kalyana Raman, where the Supreme Court observed that the procedural fairness is the main requirement in the administrative action. The fairness or fair procedure in the administrative action ought to be observed. The Selection Committee cannot be an exception to this principle. It must take a decision reasonably without being guided by extraneous or irrelevant consideration. 17. K. Kalyana Raman, where the Supreme Court observed that the procedural fairness is the main requirement in the administrative action. The fairness or fair procedure in the administrative action ought to be observed. The Selection Committee cannot be an exception to this principle. It must take a decision reasonably without being guided by extraneous or irrelevant consideration. 17. No rights or status can accrue from an order made by an authority not legally competent to make it in the light of judgment in AIR 1964 SC 521 (para 8), State of Punjab v. Jagdip Singh, where the Supreme Court observed that where an appointment/promotion is made in contravention of the statutory rules or by an authority not competent to make it or the irregularity in making it goes to the very root for instance there were no vacancies, there is no legal foundation of the order and no rights are created. 18. An appointment de hors of statutory provisions is invalid ab initio in view of judgment in AIR 1974 SC 238 (para 8) University of Kashmir v. Mohd. Yasim, where the Supreme Court observed when a statute created a body and vested the powers of appointment in the University council by prescribing the manner of its exercise of power, the appointment made de hors of these provision could not be valid. It cannot be validated on the theory of factum valet, also. 19. In respect of examining the effect on those, who are employed by virtue of irregular appointments by the authorities the Supreme Court in AIR 1965 SC 1293 , C. Channabasavaiah v. State of Mysore, observed that a selection was made by the Mysore Public Service Commission for appointment to Class I and II posts in the State Administrative Service. 98 persons were declared successful and given appointment. Subsequently the State Government sent a list of 24 candidates for consideration of the Commission who approved it. Those 24 persons were also appointed. 16 candidates who had not been selected filed a writ petition in the Mysore High Court. As a compromise, the State Government undertook to appoint them also. Three of them had not been called for interview at all. Thereafter, some other candidates who had not been selected approached the Supreme Court. The Supreme Court set aside the appointments made at the instance of the Government and the 16 writ petitioners. As a compromise, the State Government undertook to appoint them also. Three of them had not been called for interview at all. Thereafter, some other candidates who had not been selected approached the Supreme Court. The Supreme Court set aside the appointments made at the instance of the Government and the 16 writ petitioners. While setting aside the selection and appointments the Court observed : "it is very unfortunate that these persons should be uprooted after they had been appointed but if equality and equal protection before the law have any meaning and if our public institutions are to inspire that confidence which is expected of them we would be failing in our duty if we did not, even that the cost of considerable inconvenience to Government and the selected candidates do the right thing. " (page 1296) 4 20. In AIR 1988 Patna High Court (Full Bench) 26, para 46, Rita Mishra v. Director, Primary Education, Bihar, where the appointments were said to have obtained on the basis of forgery, no right was held to be created and accrued to the beneficiaries in respect of payment of salary even though the persons appointed have rendered work. 21. In 1995 Supp. (1) SCC 188, Gurdeep Singh v. State of J. & K, it was held by the Supreme Court that the selection procured by illegal means should not be permitted to continue even on human consideration. 22. In AIR 1992 SC 1806 , National Institute of Mental Health and Neuro Science v. Dr. Kalyana Raman, the Supreme Court has held that the selection committee must observe procedural fairness and that its decision must be reasonable, non-arbitrary and not based on extraneous or irrelevant consideration. 23. In (1996)7 SCC 333 , Paschim Bangal, Prathamik Shikshak Shikshan etc. Samity v. President, W. B. Primary Schools Council, the Supreme Court held that selection vitiated by gross irregularities is liable to be cancelled. 24. 23. In (1996)7 SCC 333 , Paschim Bangal, Prathamik Shikshak Shikshan etc. Samity v. President, W. B. Primary Schools Council, the Supreme Court held that selection vitiated by gross irregularities is liable to be cancelled. 24. In 2003 (2) LBESR 664 (All) : (2003)2 UPLBEC 1527 , this High Court (Division Bench) in Ram Briksh Prasad v. Member-Secretary, Regional Administrative Committee/assistant General Manager/regional Manager, U. P. Co-operative Bank Ltd. , Regional Office, Gorakhpur and another, where the termination of a bank employee from service in reference to Rule 59-B (3) U. P. Primary Agricultural Credit Co- operative Societies Rules, 1975 and in reference to U. P. Primary Agricultural Credit Co-operative Societies Centralised Service Regulations, 1976 on the ground of embezzlement of about 5 lakhs rupees, such employee was found absconded and did not attend the duty despite publication in local newspaper,such employee was suspended thereafter, terminated and had earlier filed writ petition, which was dismissed to avail alternative remedy of appeal, which too was dismissed, after examining the entire facts relating to termination, this Court found that the order of termination was only proper step and there was no illegality while terminating the service of the writ petitioner. 25. The question of selections and appointments made de hors the rules have been considered from time and again and the Honble Supreme Court has held that such appointments are unenforceable and in executable. It is settled legal proposition that any appointment made de hors the rules violates the public policy enshrined in the rules and thus, being void, cannot be enforced. (Vide Smt. Ravinder Sharma and another v. State of Punjab and others, (1995)1 SCC 138 ; Smt. Harpal Kaur Chahal v. Director, Punjab Instructions, 1995 (Suppl) 4 SCC 706; State of Madhya Pradesh v. Shyama Pardhi, (1996)7 SCC 118 ; State of Rajasthan v. Hitendra Kumar Bhatt, 1997 (2) LBESR 872 (SC) : (1997)6 SCC 574 ; Patna University v. Dr. Amita Tiwari, AIR (sic) SC 3456; Madhya Pradesh Electricity Board v. S. S. Modh and others, AIR 1997 SC 3464 ; Bhagwan Singh v. State of Punjab and others, (1999)9 SCC 573 and Chancellor v. Shankar Rao and others, (1999)6 SCC 255 . 26. Amita Tiwari, AIR (sic) SC 3456; Madhya Pradesh Electricity Board v. S. S. Modh and others, AIR 1997 SC 3464 ; Bhagwan Singh v. State of Punjab and others, (1999)9 SCC 573 and Chancellor v. Shankar Rao and others, (1999)6 SCC 255 . 26. An appointment de hors the rules violates the mandate of the provisions of Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution as held by the Honble Supreme Court in Delhi Development Horticulture Employees Union v. Delhi Administration, AIR 1992 SC 789 and State of Haryana and others v. Piara Singh, AIR 1992 SC 2130 . In Delhi Transport Corporation v. D. T. C. , Mazdoor Congress and others, AIR 1991 SC 101 . The Honble Supreme Court recognised the public employment as public property and held that all persons similarly situated have a right to share in it, though its enjoyment is subject to the recruitment rules which must be in consonance to the scheme of the Constitution of India. 27. In Dr. M. A. Haque and others v. Union of India and others, (1993)3 SCC 213, the Supreme Court observed as under : ". . . . . . . . . . . We cannot lose sight of the fact that the recruitment rules made under Article 309 of the Constitution have to be followed strictly and not in breach. If a disregard of the rules and by passing of the Public Service Commissions are permitted, it will open a back-door for illegal recruitment without limit. In fact this Court has, of late, been witnessing a constant violation of the recruitment rules and a scant respect for the constitutional provisions requiring recruitment to the services through the Public Service Commission. It appears that since this Court has in some cases permitted regularisation of the irregularly recruited employees, some Governments and authorities have been increasingly resorted to irregular recruitments. The result had been that the recruitments rules and the Public Service Commissions have been kept in cold storage and candidate dictated by various considerations are being recruited as a matter of course. " 28. Depricating the practice of making appointment de hors the rules by the State or other State instrumentalies in the case of Dr. The result had been that the recruitments rules and the Public Service Commissions have been kept in cold storage and candidate dictated by various considerations are being recruited as a matter of course. " 28. Depricating the practice of making appointment de hors the rules by the State or other State instrumentalies in the case of Dr. Arundhati A. Pargaonkar v. State of Maharashtra, AIR 1995 SC 962 , the Court rejected the claim of the petitioner therein for regularisation on the ground of long continuous service by observing as under : "nor the claim of the appellant, that she having worked as Lecturer without break for 9 years on the date the advertisement was issued she should be deemed have been regularised appears to be well founded. Eligibility and continuous working for howsoever long period should not be permitted to over- reach the law. Recruitment of rules of selection. . . . . . . . cannot be substituted by humane considerations. Law must take its course. " 29. The Honble Supreme Court in State of U. P. and others v. U. P. State Law Officers Association and others, AIR 1994 SC 1654 , has observed as under : "this being so those who come to be appointed by such arbitrary procedure can hardly complain if the termination of their appointment is equally arbitrary. Those who come by the back door have to go by the same door. . . . . . . . The fact that they are made by public bodies cannot best them with additional sanctity. Every appointment made to a public office, howsoever made, is not necessarily vested with public sanctity. There is, therefore, no public interest involved in saving all appointments irrespective of their mode. From the inception some engagements and contracts may be the product of the operation of the spoils system. There need be no legal anxiety to save them. " 30. Even if there are no statutory Rules or bye-laws of the society providing a mode of appointment, the Executive Instructions/policy adopted by the respondent-society must be there, providing for a mode of appointment. Even if no such Executive Instructions/policy/guidelines/circulars etc. are in existence then a fair procedure for appointment has to be adopted in consonance to the provisions of Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution. (Vide Nagpur Improvement Trust v. Yadaorao Jagannath Kumbhare, (1998)8 SCC 99 ). 31. Even if no such Executive Instructions/policy/guidelines/circulars etc. are in existence then a fair procedure for appointment has to be adopted in consonance to the provisions of Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution. (Vide Nagpur Improvement Trust v. Yadaorao Jagannath Kumbhare, (1998)8 SCC 99 ). 31. In Ramesh Kumar Sharma and another v. Rajasthan Civil Services Appellate Tribunal and others, AIR 2000 SCW 4206, the Supreme Court held that expression service Rules cannot be given a restrictive meaning in the absence of the definition of the said terms and, therefore, it would include within its sweep, the necessary Government orders providing the method of recruitment. 32. A Constitution Bench of the Supreme Court in B. R. Kapoor v. State of Tamil Nadu, (2001)7 SCC 231 , (Jayalalitha case) has observed that it is the duty of the Court to examine whether the incumbent possesses qualification for appointment and the manner in which the appointment came to be made or the procedure adopted was fair, just and reasonable and if not, appointment should be struck down. 33. The Supreme Court (Constitution Bench) in Ajit Singh (II) v. State of Punjab and others, 2000 (1) LBESR 43 (SC) : (1999)7 SCC 209 , has held that Articles 14 and 16 (1) are the basic features of the Constitution. The same view has been reiterated in Ashok Kumar Gupta v. State of U. P. and others, (1997)5 SCC 201 and Indra Sawhney v. Union of India and others, (2000)1 SCC 168 , thus, strict adherence is required thereto. 34. In Kumari Shrilekha Vidhyarthi etc. v. State of U. P. and others, AIR 1991 SC 537 and A. P. Aggarwal v. Government (NCT) of Delhi and others, (2001)1 SCC 600, the Supreme Court has held that every State action, in order to survive, must not be susceptible to vice, the arbitrariness which is a crux of Article 14 of the Constitution and the very basis of the rule of Law. 35. 35. This Court (DB) in 2004 (1) LBESR 1062 (All) : 2004 (1) ESC (All) 444, Arvind Kumar Pipal and others v. Commissioner, Trade Tax, U. P. , Lucknow and others, has also held that when the irregularities were found to be committed in the selection process and review selection committee after examining record recommended for cancellation of appointment then no opportunity of hearing is necessary while cancelling the appointments made in pursuance of illegal and irregular selection process and the same could not be termed as arbitrary. 36. After considering large number of decisions of this High Court as well as of the Supreme Court, this Court had an occasion to consider the very important aspects in the order dated 18-12-2003 passed in Civil Misc. 36. After considering large number of decisions of this High Court as well as of the Supreme Court, this Court had an occasion to consider the very important aspects in the order dated 18-12-2003 passed in Civil Misc. Writ Petition No. 1648 of 1986, Mahendra Mishra v. Up Nideshak (Prashasan), Rajya Krishi Utpadan Mandi Parishad and another, (since reported in 2004 (1) LBESR 266 (All)) where the detailed following question were considered and the same were dealt within the above order as under : " (7) To deal the issue involved in the present case it would be necessary to consider very important aspects in the interest of justice, rule of law and in the great interest of public, when any particular process or selection or appointment has suffered from legal and procedural improprieties, deficiencies, irregularities, illegalities, foul-play, corruption, dubious, malpractice, fraud, forgery, falsity,scandal, misrepresentation, mala fide favouritism, non-availability of post/vacancy, illegal and erroneous constitution of selection committee, selection being bad for lack of proper sanction of competent authority or for lack of competency of appointing authority and the said selection is defective for statutory procedural infirmities e. g. , for non-publishing advertisement or not inviting names from employment exchange, selection made without interview, fake and ghost interviews, tempering with records, fabricating documents or non-observance of reservation policy, anomaly in preparation of select list, unauthorised appointments made beyond expiry of the select list, taking benefit of manipulation in date of birth and production of false certificates degree, lack of eligibility criteria, deficiency in qualification, admission to a course or benefits gains in any form procured by foul means, non-observance of other provisions or requirements of relevant act, rules regulations bye-laws, norms, Government orders, official memorandum, legal established pattern, (as same examples out of many 8 more variety of defects) then selected beneficiary candidate as an outcome of such defective selection or spoiled system if appointed and has started working acquiring legal right to the post shall be removed in the prescribed manner. " " (101) It is well-settled that the appointment made from selection de hors the rules or provisions of the `act applicable are unenforceable and inexecutable, thus,are to be set aside as the rule of law. " " (101) It is well-settled that the appointment made from selection de hors the rules or provisions of the `act applicable are unenforceable and inexecutable, thus,are to be set aside as the rule of law. The system and the public at large become susceptible, could never tolerate such illegality and the illegally appointed person being product of spoiled system, however, the declaration of such appointment of the beneficiary candidate to be a defective output or ingenuine product is to be made undergoing a process or by making inquiry or probe, needed in facts and circumstances in reference to the complaint or on the information to the State or competent authority. However, such probe or inquiry is for the specific purpose unlike disciplinary inquiry, nevertheless is to be exhaustive and broad based to such an extent so that in its optimum amplitude and horizon the effected party being a beneficiary candidate may also be given a chance by associating himself to consider his stand or say treating him a necessary ingredient or component and also in order that possible aspects might be taken care of indicated above in the process and no scope is left or nothing remains or desired to be placed or incorporated on the part of the beneficiary candidate before finalisation of the verdict or declaration in respect of the ingenuinity or defectiveness or illegalities of selection or appointment or benefits/gains in any form. The social order, healthy system, interest of justice and interest of public requires that if any person has procured appointment by utilising forged degree or certificate or wrong date of birth or erroneous qualification or has used concocted documents to procure employment then service of such person if terminated by the Court on the sole ground of non-providing of opportunity of hearing or principle of natural justice then this may give unusual message tantamounting acknowledging such deficiencies and illegalities being completely ignored or rectified because the ingenuinity and misdeeds and foul play in the background persists in gain or appointment of such beneficiary candidate and it shall always pinch to the system as thorn to the healthy body. Likewise also, if one or many of the persons have procured appointment on the basis of some G. O. notification or order or circular, which later on after inquiry or probe turned out to be bogus, fake and non-existent then before declaring the selection or appointment as ingenuine or defective, if any person out of lot has been inquired into and defectiveness of appointment and selection has been proved then beneficiaries in mass are not to be heard separately. The principle of natural justice need not to be stretched too far so as to include in its ambit and scope of providing of opportunity of hearing a full fledged detail inquiry in respect of deficiencies mentioned in paragraph 7 above. It all depends on the facts and circumstances. If some document, order, notification, circular found to be in genuine and illegal, however, has been utilised for the purpose of procuring employment then the declaration that such order, document, notification or circular is bogus, forge, fake, non- existent by author or competent authority in whose name these are said to be issued, then beneficiary candidates need not be given opportunity of hearing in the light of the verdict of Supreme Court in B. Sheetal Nandwani (supra ). (102) The defects as referred in paragraph 7 above are few examples only, there may be many more cause depending upon the facts and circumstances affecting the sanctity of appointment or selection or gains derived in any form. Need of hour and public demand is to get best calibre, output or product from the system, for which in deed the productive system has to be made healthy, clean, genuine. In any case everyone discards defective piece as product of spoiled system. If the drawbacks and flaws have cropped up since inception and structural defects inherited in the system of production making it spoiled system, the output product is bound to be imperfect and defective one, therefore, the defects as indicated or conceived of in paragraph 7 above are to be eradicated on administrative or judicial side, however, in both fairness and observance of principle of natural justice shall be necessary. The competent authority might refer the inquiry report, so made earlier, or look at the proposed inquiry or probe or proceeding to be conducted subsequently taking into consideration records and documents and fixing also specific date, time and place and allowing the beneficiary candidate to avail oral personal hearing and to adduce evidences and further permission to examine or cross-examine the witnesses. The beneficiary candidate has to be heard so that truth may be arrived at and it could not be said at any stage that something was left from consideration or desired to be incorporated on the part of the beneficiary candidate. The opportunity of hearing to beneficiary candidate is neither farce nor mandatory or director, in every case is most essential ingredient and legal requirement to be adopted to arrive at truth and to achieve finality and precision in the finding or declaration. The hearing of the beneficiary candidate is in order to bring perfection in the finding on the issue of appointments or selection or gains derived, by covering vital aspects and broad based parameters and giving weightage on different parameters involved in inquiry or probe and in hearing before or after in reference to the defects depending upon the facts and circumstances. Sometimes the competent authority or inquiry officer may concentrate or contemplate much on the documents or records, sometimes on the oral or written evidences only. Sometimes more weightage over the statement of witnesses may be vital. However, all these shall depend upon the requirement of the case and on the wisdom of the competent authority. In order to ensure precision and fairness in the finding of the inquiry or probe, the beneficiary candidate as an affected party, is to be heard treating him to be an essential component of the inquiry or the declaration. Providing of opportunity of hearing to the beneficiary candidate in reference to the inquiry or probe or declaration may not be so casual, as the beneficiary candidate may drag on hearing unnecessarily. However, depending on the facts and circumstances in a particular case, even a written submission preferred at the choice of the beneficiary candidate may serve the purpose or may be treated as sufficient for observance of principle of natural justice. However, depending on the facts and circumstances in a particular case, even a written submission preferred at the choice of the beneficiary candidate may serve the purpose or may be treated as sufficient for observance of principle of natural justice. If by other than conventional mode, during adjudication by the Court/tribunal while considering the pleadings of the parties, if the selection or appointment in question is proved or declared as defective then it shall be necessary to hear the affected party in reference to such declaration. If the declaration of the selection or appointment to be defective is not based on inquiry or probe, the beneficiary candidate being affected party may be heard even on subsequent stage, in any case, before passing termination order. In conspectus,the beneficiary candidate being an outcome of such selection, which has been noted to be defective or spoiled selection, on the basis of inquiry or probe acknowledged as such by the Court or Tribunal, shall have no legal right to remain in the employment and is bound to be ceased or ousted in any case but in accordance with law and the affected beneficiary person is either to be heard by associating him in reference to such inquiry or probe or declaration so that the stand of affected party may be incorporated before taking the decision of ousting him by the competent authority. (103) In view of the foregoing analysis and observations, now it is clear when any selection recruitment or appointment to some post was made or benefits gains are procured illegally and it is noticed on the complaint or at subsequent stage that illegalities, irregularities, improprieties, procedural infirmities and deficiencies and defects have occurred, forgery or foul-play adopted or non-observance of Act, rules, norms were made in process then the beneficiary candidate, who has become output and product of such defective and bad selection or outcome of spoiled system process shall have no right or claim to the post or salary or any consequential benefits in the service by virtue of such selection or appointment or gains in any form being illegal or void or non est and being violative of mandate of provisions of Articles 14 and 16 of Constitution, but before termination or dismissal of such persons or beneficiaries, a proper inquiry associating with such beneficiary candidates shall have to be made by providing them opportunity of hearing in consonance to the principle of natural justice. If at the instance of some complaint or at the instance of competent authority or of the State Government or employer, the proper inquiry or probe taking into consideration the facts, circumstances, records, evidences or witnesses has already been made by any of the competent authority and person being a beneficiary candidate has been associated in the said inquiry or probe or investigation and such inquiry has been made in consonance to the principle of natural justice then termination of beneficiary candidate in such circumstances shall not be said to be illegal and such beneficiary candidate is not to be given opportunity of hearing any more, but in the circumstances indicated above if the beneficiary candidate by virtue of being a product of a defective selection or process is dismissed or terminated and no inquiry was ever made as indicated above and such termination order is set aside on the ground of not providing of opportunity of hearing in consonance to the principle of natural justice, the Court at its pleasure may direct a fresh inquiry or probe to be made in accordance with law keeping in view the gravity of defects, charges, drawbacks, allegations involved in the said selection as narrated in paragraph (7) above inherited in the said selection or process or appointment or illegal gains and in order to eradicate defects and evils, which had cropped up or had insinuated from its inception. If the beneficiary candidate is heard in reference to the inquiry or probe or report by providing him adequate opportunity of hearing in consonance to the principle of natural justice before termination of his service then subsequent another opportunity of hearing shall not be necessary. If the beneficiary candidate is heard in reference to the inquiry or probe or report by providing him adequate opportunity of hearing in consonance to the principle of natural justice before termination of his service then subsequent another opportunity of hearing shall not be necessary. (104) In view of the foregoing analysis and observations, the legal propositions are summarised, when the selection or appointment or benefits gains in any form procured by one individually or by many collectively on one or other drawbacks or grounds as mentioned above in paragraph 7 are found to be defective or noted as output of spoiled system then following steps are necessary to be observed : 1 (i) Keeping in view the facts and circumstances of the particular case and the nature of defects, deficiencies, drawbacks in the process, selection or appointment or in the matters of benefits / gains in any form derived, the Court may evolve any suitable mode and modalities for making inquiry or probe or investigation in order to arrive at truth. (ii) The beneficiary candidate is entitled to opportunity of hearing in consonance to the principles of natural justice before termination of his service. (iii) If there exists multiple deficiencies out of what have been narrated in the paragraph 7 above or defects are complicated and mixed or issues are infricate for instance,the matter involving bribery, financial irregularities, misuse of powers and offences under Prevention of Corruption Act or involving deep rooted conspiracy then at the command of the relevant Court or at the instance of the State Government or competent authority the inquiry or probe or investigation could be made exhaustively, like, disciplinary proceedings as per applicable relevant rules in a particular case apart from examining and investigating other related documents, records, materials or persons relevant and necessary in the finalisation of controversion and scandal, but for that purpose text of allegations with documents,records, evidences relied upon, evidences and witnesses to be adduced, providing of opportunity of oral hearing, and opportunity to cross-examine the witnesses to the affected parties at fixed date, time and place and such inquiry or probe or investigation to be made in consonance to the principle of natural justice. (iv) If the defects, deficiencies, irregularities etc. (iv) If the defects, deficiencies, irregularities etc. are apparent and not complicated consisting of one or more drawbacks as narrated in paragraph 7 above then only summary inquiry or probe or investigation unlike disciplinary inquiry in consonance to the principle of natural justice in respect of the allegations or defects could be made by examining and having documents, records, materials or persons and taking the responsibility of affected beneficiary party, providing opportunity of hearing to him in consonance to the principle of natural justice. (v) Where defects, deficiencies, irregularities, fraud or forgery or admissions in a course or benefits/gains in any form, selections or appointments are referable to the verdict of the Honble Judge or any institutions or institutional head,for instance High Court or Head of Department of the State Government or Constitutional dignitaries,then the controversion or denial of existence of such documents by concerned author are sufficient to annul the benefits gains in any form derived in selection or appointment by one or many beneficiary candidates and no opportunity of hearing or observance of principle of natural justice shall be necessary in those cases. 2 (vi) When the beneficiary candidate was already associated and heard by observing principle of natural justice in the inquiry or probe in respect of the selection or appointment or in respect of gains in any form and when the inquiry or probe was made suo moto or on general or specific complaint made on behalf candidates participating in the selection in question or on the basis of preliminary inquiry conducted for and on behalf of the appointing authority or on the basis of audit or inspection report, the State Government or competent authority or employer thereafter, has made itself or got conducted a detailed inquiry through C. B. I. or an independent agency or Vigilance department or committee, taking into consideration all the facts, circumstances, records, evidences and witnesses and on the basis of finding arrived at out of such inquiry and the selection in question is found to be defective on one or more out of above mentioned drawbacks grounds, then further opportunity of hearing to the beneficiary candidate before termination of service is not necessary to be given. (vii) When for one or many of the drawbacks and grounds mentioned in above paragraph 7, the gains or selection or appointment is found defective and the termination of the service of the beneficiary candidate is set aside for not providing opportunity of hearing or for non-observance of principles of natural justice, in those circumstances reinstatement of beneficiary candidate in service with consequential benefits shall not be a usual phenomena. (viii) Keeping in view the seriousness of defects and drawbacks occurred in the selection or appointment in question, the Court at its pleasure and in the interest of justice and in order to uphold the rule of law, may direct inquiry or probe to be made afresh, allowing the participation of the beneficiary candidate with a view to provide opportunity of hearing in consonance to the principles of natural justice and to take decision within a stipulated time and the Court at its pleasure may not allow the reinstatement of such beneficiary candidate being an output of defective selection till a fresh inquiry is conducted and decision is taken in consonance to the directions of the Court. (ix) The above mentioned drawbacks or defects cropped up or inherited in the selection or appointment or insinuated from its inception could never be ignored, or overlooked or treated as redundant and could never automatically be said to be rectified or could not be dulcified on the reinstatement of the beneficiary candidate in service when the termination of such beneficiary candidate is set aside on the ground of principle of natural justice. (x) For reinstatement it is not necessary to show sympathy to the beneficiary candidate for his bona fide, or for claim of no fault on his part or for his innocence. (x) For reinstatement it is not necessary to show sympathy to the beneficiary candidate for his bona fide, or for claim of no fault on his part or for his innocence. 3 (xi) When the selection or appointment is found to be defective for one or on many grounds or drawbacks mentioned paragraph 7 above, the beneficiary candidate is bound to be brought under penal action even if the misdeeds was not directly attributable on his part and the effect of the setting aside the selection in question would mean and cannot that the selectee/beneficiary candidate shall have no right to the post or to the salary and the salary and perks received by him by virtue of such illegal and unauthorised appointment is normally to be repaid to the State Government or the employer unless the Court for reasons to be recorded does not pass any order for withholding of repayment in a particular case. (xii) The Court in the interest of justice and to uphold the dignity of rule of law and to maintain fairness in administration, may indicate or may give liberty to the State Government or employer to proceed to take proper action in accordance with law against those authorities or officers, who were instrumental or involved in such defective and scandalous selection or appointment or illegally extending benefits/gains in any form, so that wrong doers and persons involved might not be ignored for their misdeeds and misconduct. " 37. I have heard learned Counsels for the parties and perused the report of District Judge, Deoria. The District Judge, Deoria after his independent inquiry has arrived at a finding that there is deep-rooted conspiracy between the petitioner and official, e. g. Dr. Balbir Singh, the then C. M. O. , Deoria and one Clerk Sri Kaushal Kishore Srivastava, who were involved in corruption in making appointment of petitioner alongwith many others and about thirty nine criminal cases were pending against Dr. Balbir Singh, the then C. M. O. Deoria and clerk associated with him. Balbir Singh, the then C. M. O. , Deoria and one Clerk Sri Kaushal Kishore Srivastava, who were involved in corruption in making appointment of petitioner alongwith many others and about thirty nine criminal cases were pending against Dr. Balbir Singh, the then C. M. O. Deoria and clerk associated with him. Though the order of termination is simplicitor, but when the Court has unveiled the circumstances about the appointment, background and the foundation of the termination order, it is noted that basis of the legal, irregular and forged appointment order, deep rooted conspiracy was the cause and generally if the petitioners service is terminated on the ground of illegality, forgery and corruption made in the selection process and if in the inquiry made at the direction of this Court, the irregularities in the selection have been proved and such inquiry was made by observing principle of natural justice after associating the petitioner and taking into consideration the relevant records, evidences and hearing version and defence of the parties then in that condition before termination of the service of such person, who managed to procure forged appointment order and became beneficiary, shall not be entitled to the principle of natural justice or any more hearing. The petitioner being an output or beneficiary of the defective and spoiled system shall have not right to the post and shall not be entitled to any salary or any service benefits. In these circumstances, no relief as prayed for could be granted to the petitioner, therefore, the writ petition is dismissed. .