JUDGMENT : P. B. BAJANTHRI, J. In the instant Letters Patent Appeal, the appellants have assailed the order of the learned Single Judge dated 17.02.2020 passed in CWJC No. 22943 of 2018. 2. The appellants were appointed on ad hoc/temporary basis vide Anneuxre-2 dated 14.05.2005 to the writ petition CWJC No. 22943 of 2018. The then Bihar Intermediate Education Council Act, 1992 was repealed in the year 2007. On account of repealing, assets & liabilities of the then Bihar Intermediate Education Council Act were transmitted to Bihar School Examination Board. Such of those persons who were appointed on ad hoc or temporary basis their services were required to be absorbed in the light of Section 3(2) of the Bihar Intermediate Education Council Repeal Act, 2007 (for short "Repeal Act, 2007). To that effect three members' committee was constituted by the State Government on 02.07.2007. It is reliably learnt that committee is stated to have submitted its report on 09.04.2010. 3. Perused the report. Author of the report is Development Commissioner, State of Bihar, Patna. On the other hand, signature of two other members is not forthcoming. In this regard, we have perused the original file and find that one another member signature is forthcoming in the file noting. From perusal of the records, we find that there is no signature or approval of the committee report by the Chairman and two other Members (Full Corum). Therefore, any action taken pursuant to the committee report dated 27.04.2010 like termination of the appellants' services is illegal the aforementioned legal infirmity has not been taken note of by the learned Single Judge. 4. Learned counsel for the respondents resisted the aforesaid issues stating that Cabinet has approved the Committee report submitted by the Chairperson of the Committee. The same cannot be appreciated for the reasons that Section 3(2) of Repeal Act, 2007 mandates relating to constitution of three members' committee and formulation of scheme of absorption etc. In fact, committee has not formulated any scheme of absorption of such of those ad hoc or temporary employees on the other hand certain criteria has been laid down in the report. Committee report has not been consented and approved by all the three officials of the Committee. Therefore, report is incomplete and illegal. 5. In fact, committee has not formulated any scheme of absorption of such of those ad hoc or temporary employees on the other hand certain criteria has been laid down in the report. Committee report has not been consented and approved by all the three officials of the Committee. Therefore, report is incomplete and illegal. 5. In the light of these facts and circumstances for noncompliance of Section 3(2) of the Repeal Act, 2007 impugned action of the respondents in terminating services of the appellants dated 18.08.2017 is set aside and order of the learned Single Judge dated 17.02.2020 passed in CWJC No. 22943 of 2018 is also set aside reserving liberty to the respondents to initiate fresh process under Section 3(2) of Repeal Act, 2007 and conclude the same within a period of six months from the date of receipt of this order. The appellants shall be taken back to duty and assigned works till fresh order is passed. For the intervening period, monetary benefits shall be calculated and disbursed in favour of the appellants. 6. Accordingly, the present Letters Patent Appeal stands allowed.