ORDER : D.N. Patel, J. This Letters Patent Appeal has, been preferred by the original petitioners in W.P. (S) No. 3656 of 2015. which was dismissed by the learned Single Judge vide judgment and order dated 28.11.2016. Hence, the original petitioners have preferred the present Letters Patent Appeal seeking regularisation against the post of Auxiliary Nurse Midwifery (hereinafter referred to as "the ANM" for the sake of brevity). 2. Having heard the learned counsels for both the sides and looking to the facts and circumstances of this case. it appears that these appellants are the original petitioners. who were employed on contract basis for a period running from 15.11.2003 to 15.11.2005, i.e.. for two years as ANMs under the scheme. floated by the Central Government viz. "Reproductive Child Health Scheme". 3. It further appears from the facts of the case that after 2005, the services of these appellants were never invited by the State of Jharkhand for several months. 4. Thereafter. in the year 2008. another scheme was floated by the Central Government viz. "National Rural Health Mission". 5. Under this new scheme. again these appellants (original petitioners) were given contractual appointments. Different petitioners were given appointment letters for different dates. which are at Annexure-3 series to the memo of the Letters Patent Appeal. 6. Much has been argued by the learned counsel for the appellants as the appellants were working since 2008 and their services ought to have been regularized by the Government of Jharkhand as ANM and. therefore the writ petition was preferred being W.P. (S) No. 3656 of 2015 by these appellants. 7. It appears that as per the Rules enacted by the State of Jharkhand, which are at Annexure-5. in the year 2014 only those ANMs, who were appointed by the State of Jharkhand to work in any of the Departments of the Government of Jharkhand with certain conditions mentioned therein, are to be regularized. Much has been argued by the learned counsel for the appellants that under these Rules, which are of the year 2014 (Annexure-5), these appellants ought to have been regularized as ANMs. 8. Much has been argued by the learned counsel for the appellants that under these Rules, which are of the year 2014 (Annexure-5), these appellants ought to have been regularized as ANMs. 8. We are not in agreement with the contentions, raised by learned counsel for the appellants, mainly for the reasons that :- (a) Looking to the regulations of 2014 for regularization (Annexure-5), it appears that as per Clause 2 (kh) to be read with other sub-clause of Clause-2 to be read with Clause 4(kh), only those ANMs, who were appointed by the Government of Jharkhand for working in the departments of the Government of Jharkhand and if they have completed five years services and if they are otherwise qualified to be appointed as ANMs and if they have not completed the age of 60 years, their services can be regularized. (b) Looking to the contractual employment given to these appellants, it appears that they were appointed under the Scheme floated by the Central Government namely National Rural Health Mission. (c) It further appears that the State of Jharkhand has never engaged these appellants as ANMs within the Department of State of Jharkhand for the work to be done for the State of Jharkhand. (d) These appellants were appointed only under National Rural Health Mission. Had there been no such type of Central Government Scheme. perhaps they would not have been engaged on contractual basis. 9. Thus there is a difference in the engagement of these appellants under the Central Government Scheme and the engagement of other ANMs• by the Government of Jharkhand itself for the work to be done within the departments of the State of Jharkhand. Thus. services of only those ANMs. who were appointed by the State of Jharkhand for the State of Jharkhand and who are working within the departments of the State of Jharkhand. can be regularized under "Rille 2014" (Annexure-5 to the memo of the Letters Patent Appeal). 10. As per Rille. 2014. services of those ANMs. who were appointed under the scheme floated by the Central Government. could not have been regularized. Otherwise also. they are appointed on contractual basis. The existence of their services, remains till the existence., of the scheme of the Central Government. Their engagement is only during the existence of the scheme of the Central Government. 2014. services of those ANMs. who were appointed under the scheme floated by the Central Government. could not have been regularized. Otherwise also. they are appointed on contractual basis. The existence of their services, remains till the existence., of the scheme of the Central Government. Their engagement is only during the existence of the scheme of the Central Government. If the scheme continues, such types of the ANMs may continue under that very scheme. 11. Even otherwise also in those institutions. which are the "State" within the meaning of Article 12 of the Constitution of India. the authority can engage the employees in a public employment only after giving public advertisement and following the rules and regulations. Those employees, who have got backdoor entries, i.e., those employees who have got public employment without any advertisement. without any interview and without following rules and regulations of the appointment, their services cannot be regularized. 12. It has been held by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Nagendra Chandra and others v. State of Jharkhand and others, reported in (2008) 1 SCC 798 , as under : "9. In view of the foregoing discussion, we have no option but to hold that if an appointment is made in infraction of the recruitment rules, the same would be violative of Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution and being nullity would be liable to be cancelled. In the present case, as the vacancies were not advertised in the newspapers, the appointments made were not only in action of Rule 663(d) of the Bihar Police Manual but also violative of Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution, which rendered the appointments of the appellants as illegal; as such the competent authority was quite justified in terminating their services and the High Court, by the impugned order, was quite justified in upholding the same." (Emphasis supplied) It has further been held by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of State of Bihar v. Upendra Narayan Singh and others, reported in (2009) 5 SCC 65 , as under :- 32. Notwithstanding the basic mandate of Article 16 that there shall be equality of opportunity for all citizens in matters relating to employment for appointment to any office under the State, the spoils system which prevailed in America in the 17th and 18th centuries has spread its tentacles in various segments of public employment apparatus and a huge illegal employment market has developed in the country adversely affecting the legal and constitutional rights of lakhs of meritorious members of younger generation of the country who are forced to seek intervention of the Court and wait for justice for years together. Spoils system - A bird's eye view 33. In the 17th and i8th centuries a peculiar system of employment prevailed in America. Under that system, leaders of the political party which came to power considered it to be their prerogative to appoint their faithful followers to public offices and remove those who did not support the party. The system was developed in New York and Pennsylvania more than elsewhere, largely because of the existence in those States of a large body of apathetic non-English voters. In New York, the ill-devised council of appointment had' much to do with the growth of this system. In the Federal Government, Jefferson implemented this system to a large extent. The prescription of a four-year term for various offices considerably increased appointment of political faithfuls to public offices and positions. The politicians who surrounded Jackson brought this system to its full development as an engine of party warfare. Since then it became a regular feature in every administration. 34. The phrase "spoils system" was derived from the statement of Senator W.L. Marcy of New York, in a speech in the Senate in 1832. Speaking of the New York politicians, he said : "They see nothing wrong in the rule that to the victor belong the spoils of the enemy." By 1840, the spoils system was widely used in local, State and Federal Governments. As a result of this, America fell far behind other nations in civil service standards of ability and rectitude. 35. When William Henry Harrison became President in 1841, the practice of appointing political followers reached its pinnacle. Between 30,000 and 40,000 office-seekers converged on the capital to scramble for 23,700 jobs which then comprised the federal service. Numerous persons hired through the spoils system were untrained for their work and indifferent to it. 35. When William Henry Harrison became President in 1841, the practice of appointing political followers reached its pinnacle. Between 30,000 and 40,000 office-seekers converged on the capital to scramble for 23,700 jobs which then comprised the federal service. Numerous persons hired through the spoils system were untrained for their work and indifferent to it. In the early days, Government work was simple. However, as the Government grew, a serious need for qualified workers developed. After the Civil War, pressure started building up for reforms in recruitment to civil services. The gross scandals of President Ulysses S. Grant's administration lent credence to the efforts of reformers George W. Curtis, Dorman B. Eaton and Carl Schurz. In 1871, Congress authorised the President to make regulations for appointment to public services and to constitute Civil Service Commission for that purpose. However, this merit system ended in 1875 because the Congress failed to provide funds for the same. Nevertheless, the experiment proved the merit system to be both functional and supportive. 36. President Rutherford B. Hayes was enamoured of reform and began to use competitive examinations as a basis for appointments. In 1881, a spurned office-seeker shot and killed President James A. Garfield. His death provoked further public outcry for civil service reform and paved way for passage of a Bill introduced by Senator George H. Pendleton of Ohio. His Bill became the Civil Service Act of 1883 and re-established the Civil Service Commission. The Act rendered it unlawful to fill various federal offices by the spoils system. Since then, much has been done to avoid the evils of the system. Federal civil service legislation has been greatly expanded. Many municipalities and States have made training and experience as a condition precedent for appointment to public offices. 37. In the territories of India ruled by Britishers also a large chunk of jobs went to the faithfuls of Britishers who were considered fit for serving British interest. 38. With a view to insulate the public employment apparatus in independent India from the virus of spoils system the framers of the Constitution not only made equal opportunity in the matter of public employment as an integral part of the fundamental rights guaranteed to every citizen but also enacted a separate part, i.e., Part XIV with the title "Services under the Union and the States". Article 309 which finds place in Chapter I of this part envisages enactment of laws by Parliament and the State Legislatures for regulating the recruitment and conditions of service of persons appointed to public services and posts in connection with the affairs of the Union or of any State. Proviso to this article empowers the President or such person as he may direct in the case of services and posts in connection with the affairs of the Union and the Governor of a State or such person as he may direct in the case of services and posts and in connection with the affairs of State, to make rules regulating the recruitment, and the conditions of service of persons appointed, to such services and posts till the enactment of law by the appropriate Legislature. 39. Article 311 which also finds place in the same Chapter gives protection to the holders of civil posts against dismissal, removal or reduction in rank by an authority subordinate to the one by which they are appointed. This article also provides that an order of dismissal, removal or reduction in rank can be passed only after holding an inquiry and giving reasonable opportunity of hearing to the affected person. 40. The provisions contained in Chapter II of Part XIV relate to Public Service Commissions. Article 315 mandates that there shall be a Public Service Commission for the Union and a Public Service Commission for each State. Article 320(1) casts a duty on the Union and the State Public Service Commissions to conduct examinations for appointments to the services of the Union and the State respectively. 41. Clause (3) of Article 320 makes consultation with the Union Public Service Commission or the State Public Service Commission. as the case may be. mandatory on all matters relating to methods of recruitment to civil services and for civil posts. on the principles to be followed in making appointments to civil services and posts and in making promotions and transfers from one service to another and on the suitability of candidates for such appointments. promotions or transfers. on all disciplinary matters affecting a person serving under the Government of India or the Government of a State in a civil capacity, including memorials or petitions relating to such matters. promotions or transfers. on all disciplinary matters affecting a person serving under the Government of India or the Government of a State in a civil capacity, including memorials or petitions relating to such matters. on any claim by or in respect of a person who is serving or has served under the Government of India or the Government of a State or under the Crown in India or under the Government of an Indian State. in a civil capacity, that any costs incurred by him in defending legal proceedings instituted against him in respect of acts done or purporting to be done in the execution of his duty should be paid out of the Consolidated Fund of India. or, as the case may be. out of the Consolidated Fund of the State. on any claim for the award of a pension in respect of injuries sustained by a person while serving under the Government of India or the Government of a State or under the Crown in India or under the Government of an Indian State, in a civil capacity. and any question as to the amount of any such award. This clause also casts a duty on the Public Service Commissions to advise on any matter referred to them by the President or the Governor. 42. However. the. hope and expectation of the framers of the Constitution that after independence every citizen will get equal opportunity in the matter of employment or appointment to any office under the State and members of civil services would remain committed to the Constitution and honestly serve the people of this country have been belied by what has actually happened in last four decades. The Public Service Commissions which have been given the status of constitutional authorities and which are supposed to be totally independent and impartial while discharging their function in terms of Article 320 have become victims of spoils system. 43. In the beginning. people with the distinction in different fields of administration and social life were appointed as Chairman and members of the Public Service Commissions but with the passage of time appointment to these high offices became personal prerogatives of the political head of the Government and men with questionable background have been appointed to these coveted positions. Such appointees have, instead of making selections for appointment to higher echelons of services on merit. Such appointees have, instead of making selections for appointment to higher echelons of services on merit. indulged in exhibition of faithfulness to their mentors totally unmindful of their constitutional responsibility. This is one of several reasons why most meritorious in the academics opt for private employment and ventures. 44. The scenario is worst when it comes to appointment to lower strata of the civil services. Those who have been bestowed with the power to make appointment on Class III and Class IV posts have by and large misused and abused same by violating relevant rules and instructions and have indulged in favouritism and nepotism with impunity resulting in total negation of the equality clause enshrined in Article 16 of the Constitution. 45. Thousands of cases have been filed in the Courts by aggrieved persons with the complaints that appointment to Class III and Class IV posts have been made without issuing; any advertisement or sending; requisition to the employments as per the requirement of the 1959 Act and those who have links with the party in power or political leaders or who could pull strings in the power corridors get the cake of employment. Cases have also been filed with the complaints that recruitment to the higher strata of civil services made by the Public Service Commissions have been affected by the virus of spoils system in different dimensions and selections have been made for considerations other than merit. 56. In the writ petition filed by them, the respondents herein made a bald assertion that they were appointed by the competent authority after following the prescribed procedure and pleaded that their services could not have been terminated in the garb of implementing the policy contained in Letter dated 16.4.1996 overlooking the fact that they had been appointed prior to the cut-off date. i.e., 28.10.1991 and the fact that they had continuously worked for almost 10 years. On behalf of the appellants herein. it was submitted that the writ petitioners should not be granted any relief because their initial appointments were per se illegal inasmuch as the Regional Director concerned had neither advertised the posts nor was any requisition sent to the employment exchange and there was no consideration of the competing claims of eligible persons. 57. In view of the contradictory assertions made by the parties on the issue of legality of the respondents. initial appointment. 57. In view of the contradictory assertions made by the parties on the issue of legality of the respondents. initial appointment. the minimum which the learned Single Judge should have done was to call upon the respondents to produce copies of the advertisement issued by the competent authority and/or requisition sent to the employment exchange and letters of interview, if any, issued to them to prove that they were appointed by following a fair procedure and after considering the claims of all eligible persons. However, without making any endeavour to find out whether the appointments of the respondents were made after following some procedure consistent with the doctrine of equality, the learned Single Judge quashed the termination of their services simply by relying upon the order passed in another case and by observing that the writ petitioners (the respondents herein) had been appointed before the cut-off date, i.e. 28.10.1991 specified in the Letter dated 16.4.1996 and they had worked for almost 10 years. 58. In the letters patent appeal filed by them, the appellants reiterated that the respondents had been appointed without following any procedure and without any selection. They also contended that even though vacant posts were not available, the then Regional Director, Gaya made large number of illegal appointments and this fact was established in the enquiry got conducted by the Department. However, the Division Bench did not deal with the issues raised in the appeal and dismissed the same by making reference to the orders passed in LPA No. 325 of 2000, Civil Review No. 27'9 of 2000 and LPA No. 47 of 2005 and observing that taking different view in the case of the respondents could lead to an anomalous position inasmuch as some persons would get back into service on the strength of the Court's order while others will be thrown out. 60. In our opinion. there is no merit in the submission of the learned senior counsel. If the initial I appointments of the respondents are found to be illegal per se. the direction given by the High Court for their reinstatement with consequential benefits cannot be approved by relying upon the so-called regularisation of their services. 60. In our opinion. there is no merit in the submission of the learned senior counsel. If the initial I appointments of the respondents are found to be illegal per se. the direction given by the High Court for their reinstatement with consequential benefits cannot be approved by relying upon the so-called regularisation of their services. Had the respondents been appointed by the competent authority after issuing an advertisement or sending requisition to the employment exchange so as to enable the latter to sponsor the names of eligible persons then they would have certainly produced the relevant documents before the High Court or at least before this Court. However. the fact of the matter is that none of the documents which could give a semblance of legitimacy to the appointments of the respondents was produced before the High Court and none has been produced before this Court. 65. In view of the above discussion. we hold that the initial appointments of the respondents were made in, gross violation of the doctrine of equality enshrined in Articles 14 and 16 and the provisions of the 1959 Act and the learned Single Judge gravely erred by directing their reinstatement with consequential benefits. 67. By now it is settled that the guarantee of equality before law enshrined in Article 14 is a positive concept and it cannot be enforced by a citizen or Court in a negative manner. If an illegality or irregularity has been committed in favour of any individual or a group of individuals or a wrong order has been passed by a judicial forum, others cannot invoke the jurisdiction of the higher or superior Court for repeating or multiplying the same irregularity or illegality or for passing wrong order-Chandigarh Admn. v. Jagjit Singh. Jaipur Development Authority v. Daulat Mal Jain; Union of India v. J.V. Subhalah; Gursharan Singh v. NDMC; State of Haryana v. Ram Kumar Mann; Faridabad CT. Scan Centre v. D.G. Health Services; Style (Dress Land) v. UT, Chandigarh; State of Bihar v. Kameshwar Prasad Singh; Union of India v. International Trading Co. and Directorate of Film Festivals v. Gaurav Ashwin Jain." (Emphasis supplied) In the case of Mohd. Ashif and others v. State of Bihar and others, reported in (2010) 5 SCC 475 , the Hon'ble Supreme Court in paragraphs 13 and 14 held as under: "13. and Directorate of Film Festivals v. Gaurav Ashwin Jain." (Emphasis supplied) In the case of Mohd. Ashif and others v. State of Bihar and others, reported in (2010) 5 SCC 475 , the Hon'ble Supreme Court in paragraphs 13 and 14 held as under: "13. Applying; the test laid down by this Court in Umadevi (3) case and the cases referred to above, to the case at hand, there is no gainsaying that the appointments of the appellants as •Primary Health Workers were totally illegal and violative of Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution which guarantee equality of opportunity to all those who were otherwise eligible for such appointments. The Chief Medical Officer who had made the appointments was not vested with the power to do so nor were the claims of other candidates eligible for appointments. against the posts to which the appellants were appointed, considered. Surprisingly, the appointments had come by way of absorption of the appellants who were working; as Voluntary Health Workers on a monthly honorarium of Rs. 50 only. 14. The High Court has, in our opinion, correctly held that there was no cadre of Voluntary Health Workers who were working on an honorarium in State-run dispensaries. The very nature of the appointment given to the appellants as Voluntary Health Workers was honorary in nature which entitled them to the payment of not more than Rs. 50 per month. It is difficult to appreciate how the Chief Medical Officer could have regularized absorbed such Voluntary Health Workers doing; honorary service against the post of Primary Health Workers which carried a regular pay scale and which could be filled only in accordance with the procedure prescribed for that purpose. The appointment of the appellants against the said posts was thus manifestly illegal and wholly undeserved to say the least. Inasmuch as these appointments came to be cancelled pursuant to the said directions no matter nearly a decade and a half later the termination could not be said to be illegal so as to warrant interference of a Writ Court for reinstatement of those illegally appointed. The High Court was. in that view of the matter. justified in declining interference with the order of cancellation and dismissing the writ petitions. (Emphasis supplied) It has been held by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of State of Bihar and others v. Chandreshwar Pathak. The High Court was. in that view of the matter. justified in declining interference with the order of cancellation and dismissing the writ petitions. (Emphasis supplied) It has been held by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of State of Bihar and others v. Chandreshwar Pathak. reported in 2014 (4) JCR 181 (SC) : (2014) 13 SCC 232 . in paragraphs 10, 11, 12 and 13 as under: "10. The order of appointment. in the present case, is as follows : "In the light of the order passed by the Inspector General of Police, Criminal Investigation Department. Bihar. Patna. vide his Letter No. 6/86 F3 Shri Chandeshwar Pathak, s/o Shri Devnarayam Pathak of Village Haraji. PO Haraji. PS Dimbara. District Chhapra was appointed as Constable temporarily from 14.1.1988 afternoon on the condition that his previous character found satisfactory and as and when necessary, his service shall be terminated without assigning any reason or show cause. His pay scale shall be Rs. 425-10.565 EB10-605 with the basic pay of Rs. 425. He has been allotted CT No. 390." It is clear from the above order that the appointment has been given only on the asking of the Inspector General of Police. There is nothing to show that any advertisement was issued giving opportunity to all eligible candidates to compete or any selection process was undertaken before appointment of the respondent. 11. In State of Orissa v. Mamata Mohanty, it was observed as under: (SCC pp. 451-52, paras 35-36) "Appointment/employment without advertisement 35. At one time this Court had been of the view that calling the names from employment exchange would curb to certain extent the menace of nepotism and corruption in public employment. But, later on, came to the conclusion that some appropriate method consistent with the requirements of Article 16 should be followed. In other words there must be a notice published in the appropriate manner calling for applications and all those who apply in response thereto should be considered fairly. But, later on, came to the conclusion that some appropriate method consistent with the requirements of Article 16 should be followed. In other words there must be a notice published in the appropriate manner calling for applications and all those who apply in response thereto should be considered fairly. Even if the names of candidates are requisitioned from employment exchange, in addition thereto it is mandatory on the part of the employer to invite applications from all eligible candidates from the open market by advertising the vacancies in newspapers having wide circulation or by announcement in radio and television as merely calling the names from the employment exchange does not meet the requirement of the said article of the Constitution. (Vide Delhi Development Horticulture Employees' Union v. Delhi Admn. State of Haryana v. Piara Singh; Excise Supt. v. K.B.N. Visweshwara Rao; Arun Tewari v. Zila Mansavi Shikshak Sangh; . Binod Kumar Gupta v. Ram Ashray Mahoto; National Fertilizers Ltd. v. Somvir Singh; Deptt. of Telecommunications v. Keshab Deb; State of Bihar v. Upendra Narayan Singh and State of M.P. v. Mohd. Abrahim.) 36. Therefore. it is a settled legal proposition that no person can be appointed even on a temporary or ad hoc basis without inviting applications from all eligible candidates. If any appointment is made by merely inviting names from the employment exchange or putting a note on the notice board. etc. that will not meet the requirement of Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution. Such a course violates the mandates of Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution of India as it deprives the candidates who are eligible for the post, from being considered. A person employed in violation of these provisions is not entitled to any relief including salary. For a valid and legal appointment mandatory compliance with the said constitutional requirement is to be fulfilled. The equality clause enshrined in Article 16 requires that every such appointment be made by an open advertisement as to enable all eligible persons to compete on merit." 12. No contrary view of this Court has been cited on behalf of the respondent. Moreover, another Division Bench of the same High Court has upheld termination in similar matter as noted earlier against which SLP has been dismissed by this Court as mentioned earlier. 13. No contrary view of this Court has been cited on behalf of the respondent. Moreover, another Division Bench of the same High Court has upheld termination in similar matter as noted earlier against which SLP has been dismissed by this Court as mentioned earlier. 13. Accordingly, it has to be held that in the absence of any advertisement or selection process, the appointment of the respondent is not protected and could be validly terminated. The learned Single Judge was justified in dismissing the writ petition while the Division Bench erred in interfering with the same. (Emphasis supplied) The Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Renu and others v. District & Sessions Judge, Tis Hazari Courts, Delhi and another, reported in (2014) 14 SCC 50 in paragraphs 8, 9, 10, 11, 12 and 13 held as under : "8. As Article 14 is can integral part of our system, each and every State action is to be tested on the touchstone of equality. Any appointment made in violation of mandate of Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution is not only irregu1ar but also illegal and cannot be sustained in view of the judgments rendered by this Court in Delhi Development Horticulture Employees' Union v. Delhi Admn. State of Haryana v. Piara Singh; Prabhat Kumar Sharma v. State of U.P.; J.A.S. Inter College v. State of U.P.; M.P. Housing Board v. Manoj Shrivastava; M.P. State Agro Industries Development Corpn. Ltd. v. S.C. Pandey and State of M.P. v. Sandhya Tomar. 9. In Excise Supt. v. K.B.N. Visweshwara Rao, a larger Bench of this Court reconsidered its earlier judgment in Union of India v. N. Hargopal, wherein it had been held that insistence on recruitment through employment exchanges advances rather than restrict& t he rights guaranteed by Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution. However, due to the possibility of non-sponsoring of names by the employment exchange, this Court held that any appointment even on temporary or ad hoc basis without inviting application is in violation of the said provisions of the Constitution and even if the names of candidates are requisitioned from employment exchange, in addition thereto, it is mandatory on the part of the employer to invite applications from all eligible candidates from open market as merely calling the names from the employment exchange does not meet the requirement of the said articles of the Constitution. The Court further observed: (K.B.N. Visweshwara Rao case, SCC p. 218 para 6) "6. .... In addition, the appropriate department... should call for the names by publication in the newspapers having wider circulation and also display on their office notice ... and employment news bulletins; and then consider the cases of all candidates who have applied. If this procedure is adopted. fair play would be sub served. The equality of opportunity in the matter of employment would be available to all eligible candidates." (Emphasis supplied) (See also Arun Tewarl v. Zila Mansavi Shikshak. Sangh and Kishore K. Pati v. District Inspector of Schools, Midnapore.) 10. In Suresh Kumar v. State of Haryana this Court upheld the judgment of the Punjab and Haryana High Court wherein 1600 appointments made in the Police Department without advertisement stood quashed though the Punjab Police Rules, 1934 did not provide for such a course. The High Court reached the conclusion that process of selection stood vitiated because there was no advertisement and due publicity for inviting applications from the eligible candidates at large. 11. In UPSC v. Girish Jayanti Lal Vaghela this Court held: (SCC p. 490, para 12) "12. ... The appointment to any post under the State can only be made after a proper advertisement has been made inviting applications from eligible candidates and holding of selection by a body of experts or a specially constituted committee whose members are fair and impartial, through a written examination or interview or some other rational criteria for judging the inter se merit of candidates who have applied in response to 1 he advertisement made ... Any regular appointment made on a post under the State or Union without issuing advertisement inviting applications from eligible candidates and without holding a proper selection where all eligible candidates get a fair chance to compete would violate the guarantee enshrined under Article 16 of the Constitution." (Emphasis supplied) 12. The principles to be adopted in the matter of public appointments have been formulated by this Court in M.P. State Coop. Bank Ltd. v. Nanuram Yadav as under : (SCC pp. 274-75. para 24) "(1) The appointments made without following the appropriate procedure under the rules/Government circulars and without advertisement or inviting applications from the open market would amount to breach of Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution of India. (2) Regularisation cannot be a mode of appointment. Bank Ltd. v. Nanuram Yadav as under : (SCC pp. 274-75. para 24) "(1) The appointments made without following the appropriate procedure under the rules/Government circulars and without advertisement or inviting applications from the open market would amount to breach of Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution of India. (2) Regularisation cannot be a mode of appointment. (3) An appointment made in violation of the mandatory provisions of the statute and in particular, ignoring the minimum educational qualification and other essential qualification would be wholly illegal. Such illegality cannot be cured by taking recourse to regularisation. (4) Those who come by backdoor should go through that door. (5) No regularisation is permissible in exercise of the statutory power conferred under Article 162 of the Constitution of India if the appointments have been made in contravention of the statutory rules. (6) The Court should not exercise its jurisdiction on misplaced sympathy. (7) If the mischief played is so widespread and all pervasive, affecting the result. so as to make it difficult to pick out the persons who have been unlawfully benefited or wrongfully deprived of their selection. it will neither be possible nor necessary to issue individual show cause notice to each selected. The only way out would be to cancel the whole selection. (8) When the entire selection is stinking, conceived in fraud and delivered in deceit, individual innocence has no place and the entire selection has to be set aside." 13. A similar view has been reiterated by the Constitution Bench of this Court in State of Karnataka v. Umadevi, observing that any appointment made in violation of the statutory rules as also in violation of Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution would be a nullity. "Adherence to Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution is a must in the process of public employment." The Court further rejected the prayer that ad hoc appointees working for long be considered for regularisation as such a course only encourages the State to flout its own rules and would confer undue benefits on some at the cost of many waiting to compete. (Emphasis supplied) 13. (Emphasis supplied) 13. It has become fashion now a days that those who are adorning the high ranking administrative posts in the institutions which are the State within the meaning of Article 12 of the Constitution of India, they are initially engaging the persons on a contractual basis or on a temporary basis or as a daily wager and thereafter the claims are being made for their regularization after few years of services rendered by them. A thing which cannot be done directly, can never be done, indirectly. Hence, even if such types of contractual employees, temporary employees, daily wagers, who have been engaged as class IV employees without any public advertisement, without any interview, without any test and without their being an opportunity given to the public at large and even if they have worked for 5 years or 10 years or 15 years or more, their services cannot be regularized. Illegality continues and hence, no premium Cell be given to such illegality. No 'time' can save these types of illegal appointments. 14. As a cumulative effect of aforesaid facts reasons and judicial pronouncement, no error has been committed by the learned Single Judge while deciding the W.P. (S) No. 3656 of 2015 dated 28.11.2016. We also see no reason to take any other view than what is taken by the learned Single Judge. 15. Hence, there is no substance in this Letters Patent Appeal and the same is, therefore, dismissed. LPA dismissed. ***