IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.18447 of 2009 UMESH PRASAD S/O SHRI KAILASH PRASAD, R/O VILL- JAGNANDANPUR, P.S- RAHUE, DISTT- NALANDA Versus 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR 2. THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF HELATH, GOVT.OF BIHAR, PATNA 3. THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR, HEALTH SERVICES (T.B) DEPARTMENT OF HELATH, GOVT. OF BIHAR, PATNA 4. THE CIVIL SURGEON-CUM-CHIEF MEDICAL OFFICER, KHAGARIA 5. THE INCHARGE MEDICAL OFFICER, PRIMARY HELATH CENTRE, KHAGARIA with CWJC No.18480 of 2009 SURENDRA KUMAR SINGH S/O LATE DEO LAL SINGH R/O VILL.- BAGHPUR, P.S.- PARSA BAZAR, DISTT.- PATNA Versus 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR 2. THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH, GOVERNMENT OF BIHAR, PATNA 3. THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR HEALTH SERVICES (T.B), DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH, GOVERNMENT OF BIHAR, PATNA 4. THE CIVIL SURGEON - CUM - CHIEF MEDICAL OFFICER MUZAFFARPUR 5. THE INCHARGE MEDICAL OFFICER PRIMARY HEALTH CENTRE, MUZAFFARPUR with CWJC No.18481 of 2009 SUDHIR PRASAD S/O SHRI BRAHM DEO PRASAD R/O VILL.- ITASANG, P.S.- RAHUE, DISTT.- NALANDA Versus 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR 2. THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH, GOVERNMENT OF BIHAR, PATNA 3. THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR HEALTH SERVICES (T.B.), DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH, GOVERNMENT OF BIHAR, NEW SECRETARIAT, PATNA 4. THE CIVIL SURGEON - CUM - CHIEF MEDICAL OFFICER NAWADA ----------- 2/ 26.04.2010 Heard counsel for the petitioners and the counsel appearing for the State. Petitioners in all these writ applications are the appointees of Dr. A.A. Mallik, who had made illegal appointments on mass scale. The appointments of all such appointees when detected by the State authorities, were terminated. Petitioners were also terminated from the service in 2 the year 1993. The legality of appointments made by Dr. A.A. Mallik was considered by the High Court and Supreme Court in different writ applications, wherein termination orders were challenged. The writ applications were dismissed. The order passed in the writ applications were affirmed by the Supreme Court. I do not find any merit in these writ applications filed by the petitioner, since such appointments have finally been affirmed as illegal appointments. There is no merit in these applications. These writ applications are dismissed. Sanjeet/ (Mridula Mishra, J.)