IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.2067 of 2011 DEONANDAN PRASAD son of Sri Somar Singh, resident of village – Mahkar Bigha, Post Office Parasdiha, Police Station Chandi, District Nalanda, at present residing in Block Colony at Chenari Block, PO Chenari, District Rohtas ...........Petitioner Versus 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR through the Director in Chief, Health Services, Bihar, New Secretariat, Patna 2. The Additional Director, Health Services (FW), Govt. of Bihar, New Secretariat, Patna 3. The Civil Surgeon cum Chief Medical Officer, Rohtas, Sasaram 4. The Civil Surgon cum Chief Medical Officer, Madhepura 5. The Civil Surgeon cum Chief Medical Officer, Saharasa 6. The Medical Officer in charge, Primary Health Centre, Chenani, District Rohtas .........Respondents ----------- 02- 3/2/2011 Heard learned counsel for the parties. This writ petition has been preferred with the prayer to set aside the order dated 27.11.2004 (annexure 16), passed by the In- charge Medical Officer, Primary Health Centre, Chenari, whereby the services of the petitioner has been dispensed with. 2. We have perused the materials on record and considered the submissions of learned counsel for the parties. The petitioner was appointed as a Sanganak way back in the year 1972. Soon thereafter it was detected that he had secured his appointment on the basis of forged appointment letter in collusion with the Civil Surgeon, and 2 his services were dispensed with. He was thereafter appointed on the same post by order dt. 17.9.83 (Annexure 1), on the ground that he was a retrenched employee. The petitioner in collusion with the authorities was able to organize a conspiracy at this stage and Annexure-1 was the order of appointment. The correct position is that his services were dispensed with way back in 1976 on the ground that he was appointed on a forged appointment letter, and he was really not a retrenched employee. After issuance of Annexure-1, he was transferred from place to place which was part of larger conspiracy to cover up the illegal appointment. It was again detected leading to show- cause notice. On a consideration of the materials on record his services were dispensed with by the impugned order. 3. Under a general order of a Division Bench of this Court, one- man Committee headed by Mr. Uday Sinha, former Judge of this Court, was constituted to examine such matters. The petitioner approached Justice Uday Sinha Committee by preferring Case no.92/2010, where the findings of fact were recorded to the aforesaid effect. It is thus evident that the petitioner’s appointment was based on forgery, misrepresentation, collusion and conspiracy. His 3 services has, therefore, been rightly dispensed with. 4. We do not find any merit in this writ petition. It is accordingly dismissed. mrl ( S K Katriar )