JUDGEMENT 1. Heard the counsel for the petitioner and the counsel appearing for the State. 2. This application has been filed for quashing of the report submitted by Three- Men Committee contained in Letter No. 1064(4) dated 10.9.2007 whereby appointment of the petitioner has been held to be in the forged category. 3. Petitioners case is that he was appointed as daily wager by the Superintendent, Tuberculosis Hospital, Koilwar, Bhojpur vide Memo No. 161 dated 24.3.1983. He joined and discharged his duties. Since the services of the petitioner was found satisfactory, he was given extension and allowed to continue vide Letter No. 540 dated 10.7.1989. Petitioners service was regularized against Class-Ill post by the orders of the Superintendent, Tuberculosis Hospital, Koilwar, Bhojpur. Accordingly, he continued on the post. He was transferred from Koilwar to Purnea and his services were handed over under the administrative control of -Civil Surgeon-cum-Chief Medical Officer, Purnea vide Letter No. 836 dated 17.10.1989, where he gave his joining. Petitioners grievance is that thereafter, some query was made and in the year, 2004, he was terminated from his service vide order dated 16.10.2004 contained in Memo No. 1252. The termination order mentions that in fact the petitioner has not worked for all these periods. No salary was paid to him, in the acquaintance roll, there is nothing to show that he has worked. In the dispatch register, there is nothing to show that vide order contained in Memo No. 540 dated 10.7.1989, his services were regularized. His name is not mentioned in the attendance register. All these facts show that he was never appointed, never worked. This so-called appointment letter is forged. 4. This order was challenged by the petitioner by filing writ application No. 15256 of 2004 which was disposed of analogous with other writ applications including L.P.A. No. 946 of 2003*, wherein a direction was issued to the State Government for constituting Five Men Committee to examine the legality of appointment of several employees working in the Health Department. In the report submitted by Five Men Committee, services of the petitioner has been put in forged category. 5. Counsel for the petitioner submits that before categorizing his appointment as forged, he was neither noticed nor given opportunity to defend his case. For deciding any appointment as forged, full-fledged inquiry should have been done. In the report submitted by Five Men Committee, services of the petitioner has been put in forged category. 5. Counsel for the petitioner submits that before categorizing his appointment as forged, he was neither noticed nor given opportunity to defend his case. For deciding any appointment as forged, full-fledged inquiry should have been done. The person under whose signature, appointment letter had been issued should have been noticed, before categorizing his appointment letter as forged. The petitioner, who is alleged to have been appointed on the basis of forged certificate, should have been noticed. There being no reason for holding petitioners appointment letter as forged, the finding recorded by Five Men committee is illegal, arbitrary and violative of rule of natural justice, as such fit to be quashed. 6. In the counter affidavit filed on behalf of the respondent No. 5, it is stated that the petitioner entered into service by playing fraud. There is no document on record to show that petitioners appointment letter was issued by the Superintendent, Tuberculosis Hospital, Koilwar. His name does not figure in the attendance register. The statement of the petitioner in the writ application that he was terminated without any notice, is incorrect. An inquiry had been conducted by the Superintendent, Tuberculosis Hospital, Koilwar who submitted report vide Letter No. 192 dated 9.8.2004. On the basis of that report, termination letter has been issued by the Chief Medical Officer, Kishanganj. The petitioners statement that entire exercise on the part of the respondent is illegal and arbitrary, in the fact, is incorrect. 7. The documents, brought by the petitioner on record in support of genuineness of his appointment, are indicative of this fact that it was not a legal appointment. First letter of appointment dated 24.3.1983, issued under the signature of Superintendent, Tuberculosis Hospital, Koilwar, Bhojpur indicate that he was allowed to work as daily wager but so far payment of salary is concerned, it was to be made, on availability of fund. Similar is the statement in Annexure-1/A. In these letters, nowhere it has been stated that the petitioner was allowed to work against a sanctioned vacant post. Annexure-1/B which according to the petitioner is the letter of regularization, also does not show that how a person, allowed to work as daily wager, could have been suddenly regularized against Class-Ill post. Similar is the statement in Annexure-1/A. In these letters, nowhere it has been stated that the petitioner was allowed to work against a sanctioned vacant post. Annexure-1/B which according to the petitioner is the letter of regularization, also does not show that how a person, allowed to work as daily wager, could have been suddenly regularized against Class-Ill post. The petitioner has also not been able to satisfy that how from the unit of Tuberculosis Hospital, Bhojpur, he was transferred to the office of Civil Surgeon-cum-Chief Medical Officer, Purnea. All letters issued in favour of the petitioner in the transaction of his appointment, regularization and transfer seems to be in complete contradiction of the settled law and rules for appointment, regularization and promotion. The termination order (Annexure-12) indicates that the letter of appointment, promotion and transfer, on which reliance has been placed by the petitioner, in order to show that he was appointed and continued to discharge his duties are not mentioned in the relevant registers. The petitioner has not been able to show that after regularization of service, he was paid salary, his pay fixation was done and time to time, increments were allowed to him. In case, he was legally appointed in the year 1989 and continued up to 2004, his service book should have been opened, at least after regularization of his service. There are no such happenings in the case of the petitioner. 8. I do not find any error in the finding recorded by the Directorate, Health Services Bihar, Patna in the case of the petitioner. Petitioners claim that he was initially appointed on daily wages and there- after, regularized does not inspire confidence on the basis of documents, relied upon by the petitioner. In the facts and circumstances of the case, there is no reason to hold that the petitioner was appointed legally. Only in case of a legal appointee, compliance of rule of natural justice is mandatory. There is no reason to hold that impugned order is illegal. 9. This writ application is dismissed.