ORDER : None appears on behalf of the petitioner. Learned counsel for the respondent-State is present and a counter affidavit has also been filed on their behalf as well. 2. Petitioner was engaged as Malaria Technical Supervisor (M.T.S) on contractual basis under the respondent-Health Department under the World Bank Aided Scheme Phase-I. According to him he has worked from 3.6.2005 to 31.9.2012 in Primary Health Center, Bengabad, Giridih. His contractual engagement was terminated by memo no. 138(A) dated 2.4.2012 (Annexure-2) in view of the direction issued by the State Malaria Officer, Jharkhand through letter no. 280 dated 31.3.2012. Engagement of certain other M.T.S. personnel was also terminated by the same letter issued by the District Malaria Officer, Giridih, Respondent no. 5. 3. Petitioner contended that services of few other M.T.S. have been absorbed in World Bank Phase-II Aided Scheme while petitioner's case has not been considered, though he was called for appraisal and verification of his performance and mark sheet etc vide Annexure-5 and 6 respectively. Petitioner has not been absorbed though there are certificates of his satisfactory service as contained in Annexure-9 series issued by the Medical Officer In-charge, Primary Health Center, Pirtand and Bengabad, Giridih for different periods. 4. As per learned counsel for the respondent-State, petitioner was working under a scheme and could not claim absorption as a matter of right. The Department may consider absorption of such persons, who have satisfactory service, in World Bank Phase-II Scheme against the fixed post on the appraisal of their ability and performance, as per the communication dated 9.6.2012 (Annexure-A) issued by the State Malaria Officer to District Malaria Officers. Learned counsel for the respondent has referred to Annexure-B which is appraisal of the performance of different personnel working as M.T.S. Including the petitioner for different period which shows that petitioner had not discharged his duty satisfactorily. He had not submitted the monthly work progress from April 2011 to March, 2012. This forms the basis of not absorbing him. Respondents have at para 16 of their counter affidavit clearly stated that Annexure-7, which petitioner relies to show that his services were satisfactory are forged document. No such document is in the record or were ever issued by the District Malaria Officer, Giridih. This forms the basis of not absorbing him. Respondents have at para 16 of their counter affidavit clearly stated that Annexure-7, which petitioner relies to show that his services were satisfactory are forged document. No such document is in the record or were ever issued by the District Malaria Officer, Giridih. Distinction has been drawn in the case of other two persons referred to by the petitioner as per the statement made at para 13, as they were absorbed in World Bank Phase-II scheme depending upon appraisal of their services. Therefore, plea of absorption is opposed by learned counsel for the respondent- State. 5. Having taken into account the relevant material facts and the submission advanced on behalf of respondent-State, two things are obvious, firstly that petitioner was engaged on contractual basis under the World Bank Aided Scheme Phase-I for certain number of years and did not have the automatic right for absorption in Phase-II; secondly on appraisal of petitioner's performance, it was found to be unsatisfactory for the reason stated in Annexure-B as he apparently did not submit progress of monthly work in the office for the period of more than 10 months i.e. April 2011 till March, 2012. If that be so, petitioner's claim for absorption is not substantiated by the claim of satisfactory service on his part either. 6. Therefore, there are no ground for interference in the present writ application, which is accordingly dismissed.