Judgment 1. Heard counsel for the parties. 2. This writ application is directed against the order dated 27.12.2001 as contained in Annexure 1 whereby and whereunder the petitioners have been terminated from services who were working in regular work charge establishment. 3. It is submitted by learned counsel that the petitioners were engaged on daily wages in between 1979-1982 and they were absorbed on regular basis in work charge establishment w.e.f. February, 1988 vide order as contained in Annexure 4 and now they have been terminated on the ground of resolution of the Finance Department dated 23.10.1987 as contained in Annexure 7 which stipulates that the persons who continued for five years continuously w.e.f. 22.10.1984 and whose services have been found to be satisfactory would be eligible for regularisation. It is further submitted that the petitioners were engaged initially in between 1979-1982 and they are not appointees after the cut-off date i.e. 22.10.1984 and, therefore, the cut-off date as laid down in the resolution of the government aforesaid would not apply in the case of the petitioners. It is further submitted by learned counsel that no notice whatsoever was given to the petitioners nor any opportunity was provided before passing of the order impugned. 4. Learned counsel for the state submitted that since the cases of the petitioners were found contrary to the resolution of the State Government as contained in Annexure 7, they have been terminated. 5. It is not in dispute that the petitioners were regularised in the work charge establishment some times in the year 1988 and they continued on that post for more than a decade and thereafter they have been terminated even without giving them an opportunity of hearing. It further appears that the petitioners since were engaged much prior to cut-off date i.e. 22.10.1984, the resolution of the State Government as contained in Annexure 7 in no case would apply in their cases and the same would apply prospectively in the case of persons engaged after 22.10.1984 or who had completed less than five years in service w.e.f. 22.10.1984. It further appears that the petitioners continued to work on regular basis for about 13 years but no opportunity whatsoever was given to them in consonance with the principles of natural justice. It further appears that the petitioners continued to work on regular basis for about 13 years but no opportunity whatsoever was given to them in consonance with the principles of natural justice. Learned counsel for the petitioners says that this case is also covered by the ratio laid down by this court in the case of Triveni Mahto vs. The State of Bihar and Ors. and Jagdish Thakur and Ors. vs. The State of Bihar and Ors. in C.W.J.C. Nos. 7153 of 2000 and 7559 of 2000 respectively which has been affirmed up to the Supreme Court. 6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, this writ application is allowed. Order of termination passed against the petitioners as contained in Annexure 1 is set aside. The petitioners are directed to be reinstated with all consequential monetary benefits.