1 WP 5963.11 Kambli IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLTE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 5963 OF 2011 ... Priyanka Krida & Shikshan Prasarak Mandal ..Petitioner v/s. Thane Mahanager Shikshan Mandal Thane Mahanagarpalika Bhavan & Ors. ..Respondents ... Mr.A.G.Kothari for the Petitioner. Mr.Mandar Limaye for Respondent No.1. Mr.S.R.Nargolkar, Addl.G.P. for State. ... CORAM: D.K.Deshmukh & Anoop V. Mohta, JJ DATED: 22nd December, 2011 P.C.: 1. Rule. Returnable forthwith. Heard finally by consent of parties. 2. One Mr.Dileep N. Dighe was appointed as a teacher in a Primary School run by the Petitioner. His qualifications are B.A. B.Ed. His appointment was approved by the Education Officer with effect from 30th April, 2000 by order dated 28th April, 2000. Thereafter, from time to time, 2 WP 5963.11 approvals were given to the appointment of the said Mr.Dighe as a teacher in a Primary School. In the order dated 15-6-2001, it is observed that Mr.Dighe is working as a teacher in a Primary School, where the prescribed teaching qualification is D.Ed. , but Mr.Dighe does not hold that qualification, though he holds training qualification of B.Ed., therefore approval to his appointment as a teacher cannot be granted and the approval given to his appointment earlier was cancelled and the Management is also directed to terminate the services of Mr.Dighe. 3. We have heard the learned Counsel for both sides. The order is clearly unsustainable, primarily, because the order has been made in breach of the principles of natural justice. Admittedly, the appointment of Mr.Dighe as a teacher in a Primary School was approved from 2000 continuously. Therefore, if the Education Officer proposed to withdraw the approval already granted and wanted to refuse to grant the approval, the least that should have been done by him was to issue a show cause notice to the Management and the 3 WP 5963.11 concerned teacher. That has not been done. This court has said it in numerous judgments that the order having adverse consequence on the Management and the teacher cannot be made by the Education Officer without issuing them a show cause notice. Even the State Government has issued a circular directing all Education Officers that when an approval already granted is proposed to be withdrawn, it cannot be done without issuing a show cause notice to the Management and the teacher concerned. But the Education Officer in the present case has made the order cancelling the approval already granted without issuing any show cause notice to the Petitioner and the concerned teacher. . The second reason is that there is no power vested in the Education Officer either by the MEPS Act or by the Secondary School Code to direct the management to terminate the services of any teacher. The appointing authority of the teacher in a private school is the Management. The Education Officer may approve the appointment or may not approve the appointment, but that 4 WP 5963.11 does not have any impact on the validity of the appointment of the teacher concerned. The Management can choose to continue a teacher in service, whose appointment has not been approved. Only thing is that if there is no approval, grant-in-aid may not be realsed by the Government for salary of that teacher. But the Education Officer has no authority to direct the Management to terminate the services of the teacher, because that teacher does not hold adequate qualification. The order of the Education Officer is clearly without authority of law. 4. The learned Counsel for the Petitioner also invited out attention to the judgment of the Supreme Court in the case of State of Maharashtra & Ors. v/s. Tukaram Tryambak Chaudhari & Co. 2007 DGLS(Soft.) 156 to contend that one teacher with B.Ed. qualification can be appointed in a Primary School. But we do not propose to go into that question. Because, in our opinion, that question has to be considered by the Education Officer when he decides to consider whether the approval given to the appointment of 5 WP 5963.11 Mr.Dighe is liable to be revoked or not. 5. In the result, therefore, the present petition succeeds and is allowed. The order of the Education Officer dated 15-6-2011 in relation to Mr.Dighe is set aside. The Education Officer to reconsider the proposal submitted by the Management for approval to the appointment of Mr.Dighe in accordance with law and in case the Education Officer proposes to withdraw the approval already granted to the appointment of Mr.Dighe, a show cause notice shall be issued by the Education Officer to the Management and Mr.Dighe before making any such order. No order as to costs. (ANOOP V. MOHTA, J.) (D.K.DESHMUKH,J.)