JUDGMENT Narendra Nath Tiwari, J. 1. In this writ petition, the petitioners have prayed for quashing the order dated 29th January, 2003 (Annexure-11) passed by the respondents and also for quashing the termination order issued by the Superintendent, Patliputra Medical College Hospital, Dhanbad (Annexure-9). The petitioners have further prayed for a direction on the respondents to reinstate them to their original post with full back wages and all consequential benefits. 2. Short facts of the case are that the petitioners were initially engaged as daily rated employees on Class IV post. They continued to hold the post for a long time. By office order dated 16th May, 1998, the petitioners were engaged as Ward-boy against vacant sanctioned regular posts of Patliputra Medical College Hospital, Dhanbad (for short PMCH, Dhanbad). Petitioner No. 1 was engaged on 18th July, 1989 on daily wage basis. Petitioner No. 2 on 18th August, 1989 and petitioner No. 3 on 15th March, 1986 were also similarly engaged. They continued as such for several years. 3. By Letter dated 2nd September, 1999, the Principal, PMCH, Dhanbad intimated the Secretary, Health, Medical, Education and Family welfare about the said engagement and continuity of the petitioners since 1986. He also requested for sanction of fund of Rs. 1,22,572/- for payment of their wages. Before that in the year 1998, the Superintendent, PMCH, Dhanbad by letter dated 11th March, 1998 (Annexure-3) had requested the Principal, PMCH, Dhanbad to send the names and particulars of daily rated 4th grade employees for consideration of their regular appointment against sanctioned vacant posts. The Principal sent the details of daily rated employees, which also included the petitioners (vide his letter dated 20th March, 1998). By letter dated 30th April, 1998(Annexure-4), the respondent No. 4 directed the petitioners to appear with original certificates for interview in his office on 12th May, 1998. By office order dated 3rd April, 1998 (Annexure-4/A), a Selection Committee/Appointment Committee was constituted, consisting of 11 members; for selecting the candidates for appointment out of daily rated employees, working against sanctioned vacant posts. The petitioners appeared in the interview. They were selected. Thereafter, they were appointed of regular scale of pay of Rs. 775-12-955-14-1025/- against sanctioned vacant posts by office order dated 16th May, 1998 (Annexure-5) issued under the signature of the Superintendent, PMCH, Dhanbad. 4. The petitioners were then medically examined, as required for regular appointment. The petitioners appeared in the interview. They were selected. Thereafter, they were appointed of regular scale of pay of Rs. 775-12-955-14-1025/- against sanctioned vacant posts by office order dated 16th May, 1998 (Annexure-5) issued under the signature of the Superintendent, PMCH, Dhanbad. 4. The petitioners were then medically examined, as required for regular appointment. After getting fitness certificate, all the petitioners submitted their joining on 18th May, 1998 as Ward-boy (Annexure-6). The petitioners since thereafter had been performing their duties regularly. However, they were not paid their salary. They filed several representations for payment of salary. Their claim for salary was nol disposed of. On the contrary, a show cause notice was issued to them asking as to why their services be not terminated. It was, inter alia, mentioned in the show cause notice that by office order dated 16th May, 1998 the petitioners were appointed as Ward-boy against vacant posts subject to approval of the Health Commissioner, but the Health Commissioner declined to approve their appointments and had directed to terminate the services of the petitioners. The petitioners filed reply to the said show cause notice. It has been stated that the termination has not been sought on that basis, rather the matter for approval is still pending. The petitioners requested the respondents to allow them to continue on their posts and to pay their salary for the work/duty discharged by them. 5. The Superintendent, PMCH, Dhanbad after receiving the petitioners reply did not consider the same and without application of mind issued the impugned order on 12th January, 2000, terminating the services of the petitioners. 6. Against the said termination order, the petitioners filed writ petition, being CWJC No. 754 of 2000, which was finally heard and disposed of by judgment dated 19th June, 2002, directing the respondents to release the arrears of pay to the petitioners with interest @ 10% per annum. The respondents were also directed to take a decision on their prayer for reinstatement. When the said judgment was not complied with, the petitioners filed contempt application, being Cont. Case (C) No. 798 of 2002. In course of the contempt proceeding, the respondents paid the arrears of salary. The respondents also passed final order on the petitioners request of reinstatement, upholding the order of termination and rejecting their representation by order dated 29th January, 2003 (Annexure-11). 7. Case (C) No. 798 of 2002. In course of the contempt proceeding, the respondents paid the arrears of salary. The respondents also passed final order on the petitioners request of reinstatement, upholding the order of termination and rejecting their representation by order dated 29th January, 2003 (Annexure-11). 7. The petitioners have challenged the impugned orders, as contained in Annexures-9 and 11. It has been stated that the orders of petitioners termination and rejection of their representation are wholly arbitrary, unjust and illegal. The concerned respondents have rejected the petitioners representation contravening the direction of this Court, without any consideration and application of mind. The impugned order of rejection of the petitioners representation, upholding the termination order, is also based on extraneous consideration. It has been stated that the petitioners had worked for about eleven years continuously. They were also subsequently regularised after due selection in interview test by the Selection Committee, It has been stated that similarly situated persons, namely, Nand Kumar and others, who were initially engaged on daily wage basis and thereafter absorbed regularly by the respondents, are still continuing in service, but the petitioners have been discriminated against and their services have been terminated illegally and arbitrarily. 8. The respondents have contested the writ petition. In their counter- affidavit, it has been stated that the petitioners were initially engaged by the Superintendent, PMCH, Dhanbad. Subsequently, the services of the petitioners were terminated on 17th May, 1998. The Superintendent, PMCH, Dhanbad immediately, thereafter, started the process for re-appointment and for that purpose, a committee was constituted by office order dated 3rd April, 1998 and only the petitioners were called for interview before the said Committee on 12th May, 1998, whereas the admitted existing vacancies were 63. After interview, only the petitioners were appointed. When the said irregularity was detected, show cause notices were issued to them. By order dated 12th January, 2000, the services of the petitioners were terminated after considering their reply to the show cause notice, as the same was not satisfactory. The said order was challenged in the writ petition, being CWJC No. 754 of 2000. The said writ petition was disposed of remitting the matter before the concerned authority for fresh consideration. On remand, the Health Secretary reconsidered the matter and held that the appointments of the petitioners were illegal and the impugned termination order is justified. The said order was challenged in the writ petition, being CWJC No. 754 of 2000. The said writ petition was disposed of remitting the matter before the concerned authority for fresh consideration. On remand, the Health Secretary reconsidered the matter and held that the appointments of the petitioners were illegal and the impugned termination order is justified. There was no illegality in the impugned termination order. 9. It has been further stated by the respondents that the petitioners were appointed in PMCH, Dhanbad and they were terminated from there. They can only be appointed in PMCH. They cannot claim any appointment in Shree Shree Laxmi Narayan Trust Hospital, Dhanbad (for short SSLN Trust Hospital). There is no existing vacancy in PMCH for re-appointment. In Class IV, there were three different grades, namely, unskilled Grade IV, Semi Skilled Grade IV and Sweeper Grade IV. Now the work of sweeper is being done through outsourcing and no appointment is being made for the said post. The petitioners come under the category of Unskilled Grade IV. Their cases can be considered only against the vacancies of that category. There are 35 vacancies in PMCH and in SSLN Trust Hospital there were 28 vacancies i.e. altogether 63 vacancies. However, the petitioners cannot claim their appointments in SSLN Trust Hospital where there are same vacancies. There being no vacancy in proper grade in PMCH, the petitioners cannot be appointed in PMCH. Earlier the vacancies were notified and advertised for general appointment, but the petitioners did not apply against the same and did not avail the opportunity. 10. I have heard learned Counsel for the parties and considered their submissions as also the facts and material available on record. It is an admitted fact that the petitioners were initially engaged on daily rated basis in PMCH. By letter dated 11th March, 1998, the Principal, PMCH, Dhanbad was directed to send the names and particulars of daily rated employees for consideration of their regular appointments against sanctioned vacant posts. The Principal sent the petitioners names with details by letter dated 20th March, 1998. The petitioners were called for interview. They appeared in the interview and were selected vide order dated 16th May, 1998 issued by the Superintendent, PMCH, Dhanbad. By the said order, the petitioners were appointed on regular post in the pay scale of Rs. 775-1025/- against vacant posts. The petitioners were called for interview. They appeared in the interview and were selected vide order dated 16th May, 1998 issued by the Superintendent, PMCH, Dhanbad. By the said order, the petitioners were appointed on regular post in the pay scale of Rs. 775-1025/- against vacant posts. The only condition of the appointment was that the same was subject to the approval of the Health Commissioner. In the year 1999, notice to show cause was issued to the petitioners asking as to why their services be not terminated, as on daily rated employees can be appointed after the cut off date of 1st August, 1985. The appointment was not said to be bad for want of approval of the Health Commissioner. 11. By order dated 12th January, 2000, the petitioners services were terminated assuring that in future, if regular appointment is made, they shall be given preference. The petitioners had challenged the said termination order in CWJC No. 754 of 2000 and prayed for a direction to pay their arrears of salary. By judgment dated 19th June, 2002, the said writ petition was disposed of remitting the matter regarding appointment for afresh consideration. 12. By the impugned order dated 29th January, 2003, the respondents maintained the termination order dated 12th January, 2000, rejecting the petitioners claim. The respondents in their counter-affidavit have taken plea that there is no existing vacancy against which the petitioners can be appointed. It is not the stand of the respondents that the petitioners are not eligible and competent for appointment against Class IV posts. In the termination order dated 12th January, 2000, the respondents assured that the petitioners will be given preference for appointment when the vacant posts will be filled up. The petitioners complained that recently numbers of appointments against Class IV posts have been made, but the petitioners were not considered. The respondents have taken ground that the petitioners had not applied for their consideration. In my view, considering the background and the earlier appointments of the petitioners after interview, they cannot be treated at the same pedestal and as fresh candidates. Since the petitioners were selected and all the records were available in PMCH, Dhanbad, they should have been also called for consideration at the time of appointment of Class IV employees in PMCH. 13. It has been informed that the appointments have already been made and several persons have been appointed. Since the petitioners were selected and all the records were available in PMCH, Dhanbad, they should have been also called for consideration at the time of appointment of Class IV employees in PMCH. 13. It has been informed that the appointments have already been made and several persons have been appointed. Since, the persons, who have been appointed, have not made parties to this writ petition, their appointments cannot be disturbed behind their back and without giving opportunity of hearing. 14. The respondents have denied the petitioners claim that there are still vacancies against which the petitioners can be appointed. 15. In view of the said disputed position of vacancy and in the facts and circumstances of this case, this writ petition is disposed of directing the respondents to consider the petitioners claim for appointment, if any such vacancy exists at present. If no such vacancy exists at present, their claim shall be considered as and when such vacancy arises in future. Henceforth no further appointment shall be made against Class IV post in PMCH, Dhanbad without considering the petitioners claim on preference, as was assured by the respondents. The petitioners are at liberty to point out the clear vacancy, if it is available at present or if arises in future. 16. There is no order as to costs.