The present appeal has been filed against the order dated 2.7.2008 passed by learned Single Judge in C.W.I C. No. 7218 of 2008 wherein the respondent-writ petitioner has chosen to question the order passed by the appellants herein dated 15.10.2007. 2. The case of the respondent-writ petition is that he was appointed on the post of Sanitary Inspector on 23.4.1983 by the then Civil Surgeon, Darbhanga District and after a period of 24 years the order has been issued on 15.10.2007 terminating the services of the petitioner-appellant herein on the ground mentioned below:- (i) non-issuance of advertisement, (ii) no recommendation of Selection Committee, (iii) non-issuance of interview letter, (iv) non-observance of rule of reservation, (v) appointment byway of compliance of an order of the Chief Minister, (vi) the lack of jurisdiction of the Civil Surgeon in appointing the petitioner on the post of Sanitary Inspector, a State Cadre Post, (vii) non-publication of sanction strength of vacancy of post, (viii) non-issuance of appointment letter dated 23.4.1983 from the general issue register, and (ix) non-submission of the reply by the petitioner. 3. The matter has been contested by the appellant-herein and it has been stated that prima facie it was found that the respondent was appointed on 23.4.1983 by the then Civil Surgeon, Darbhanga and hence, his services were terminated basing on the directives of the Chief Secretary, Govt. of Bihar. 4. The learned Single Judge after hearing the matter passed the order basing on the judgment rendered in the case d Anil Kumar and Ors. VS. State of Bihar and Ors. reported in 1999(1) P.L.J.R. 152 which was approved by a Division Bench of this Court as also by the Apex Court while dismissing the appeal of the State. 5. It has also been observed by the learned Single Judge that the respondent writ petitioner was appointed in the year 1983 and was allowed to remain in service till 15.10.2007, i.e. for the period of more than 24 years and thus a right has vested in him to be considered for regular appointment in accordance with law. 6. It had also been made clear that if he is not found to be unfit (sic-fit?) in the selection process for the post of Sanitary Inspector, his services shall come to an end on the day such selection process is completed and the petitioner will be communicated the result of such selection. 7. 6. It had also been made clear that if he is not found to be unfit (sic-fit?) in the selection process for the post of Sanitary Inspector, his services shall come to an end on the day such selection process is completed and the petitioner will be communicated the result of such selection. 7. The State has come up against such direction as the judgment of learned Single Judge rests on the reported judgment in the case of Anil Kumar (supra) which reached finality before the Apex Court as S.L.P. filed by the State was dismissed. 8. Under the above circumstances, we do not find any illegality in the order passed by the learned Single Judge. 9. Accordingly, the appeal stands dismissed.