JUDGEMENT 1. Heard counsel representing the petitioners and counsels appearing for the State. 2. Petitioners in all these writ applications have challenged the enquiry report submitted by the Five Men Committee constituted by the State Govt. in the light of order passed in L.P.A. No. 946 of 2003. Petitioners in almost all the cases were appointed in 1980, 1990 and thereafter. Almost all the petitioners have remained in service for more than 10 years. They have also challenged their termination order as well as enquiry reports on the similar ground as has been challenged by the petitioners in C.W.J.C. NO. 6575 of 2009 and analogous cases. 3. Petitioners have stated that without issuing any notice, enquiry was conducted. Appointments of petitioners were considered illegal or forged, but similar treatments were not given to the employees, who were appointed in same transaction and should have been put in the same category. Persons who were put under irriegular category, were reinstated, but some of the persons, who were entitled for being put in the same category, have been put in illegal appointees category, or in the forged category. Considering the grounds taken by petitioners for challenging the enquiry report and termination order, it is obvious that finding recorded by this Court in C.W.J.C. No. 6575 of 2009 and analogous cases, is applicable in their case. Enquiry report in these petitioners case also has been submitted without conducting the enquiry in proper manner as per direction of High Court in LP.A. No. 946 of 2003. 4. Considering the fact that almost all these cases are similar to those writ applications already decided earlier in C.W.J.C. No. 6575 of 2009 and analogous cases, petitioners in these writ applications are also entitled for same relied. The findings recorded in C.W.J.C. No. 6575 of 2009 and analogous cases will have application in the cases of present petitioners, whose matters are being disposed of by the common order. Accordingly, the enquiry report submitted by Five Men Committee in favour of the petitioners is quashed. Their termination orders are also quashed. The respondents authorities are directed to remstate the petitioners on the post they have working. Their reinstatement will be with effect from the date of their appointments with all consequential benefits. 5. All these writ applications are allowed.