Sanjeev Prakash Sharma, J.—Heard the parties.

2. All the cases are heard together and are being disposed of by this common judgment.

3. The petitioners assail the order passed by the State Appellate Authority, dated 18.08.2022. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioners have obtained qualification from Madhayamik Shiksha Parishad, Delhi, which has verified that they had passed from the said institution. Learned counsel further submits that the District Appellate Authority had held that the petitioners to be duly qualified and directed the petitioners to continue on the post of teachers.

Learned counsel submits that the order was challenged after two years before the State Appellate Authority by the State and the State Appellate Authority has erroneously set aside the order of the District Appellate Authority and held the petitioners ineligible to continue on the post of teachers and the order of cancellation of their appointment was upheld wrongfully.

Learned counsel submits that the State Appellate Authority has failed to take notice of the order of the District Education Officer, Khagaria whereby he has started in the year 2008 only about derecognition of the said Madhayamik Shiksha Parishad, Delhi, all the petitioners had passed the course prior to 2008 and, therefore entitled to be treated as having passed from a recognized institution. Learned counsel further submits that the principles of natural justice have been violated as no opportunity of hearing was provided to the petitioners before passing of the impugned order of cancellation of their appointment which was made on the basis of simply lodging a first information report against the petitioners.

4. I have carefully considered the submissions and perused the order passed by the State Appellate Authority.

5. From the perusal of the record it is apparent that there is no order issued by the Government of Bihar recognizing the Madhayamik Shiksha Parishad, Delhi, as an institution for the purpose of appointment of teachers. In fact, this Court in C.W.J.C. No. 7313 of 2012 has held the degrees awarded by the Madhayamik Shiksha Parishad, Delhi, to be not recognized by the State. The said aspect has been noticed by the State Appellate Authority.

6. It is also to be noticed that the order passed by the High Court was upheld in LPA No. 1008 of 2012 and a review petition was also dismissed. Thus for all intents and purposes the question of qualification acquired from Madhayamik Shiksha Parishad, Delhi, to be unrecognized stands crystallized in view of the judgment as noticed above and noted by the State Appellate Authority. The attempt of the petitioners to claim recognition on the ground that the District Education Officer, Khagaria, issued derecognition order only on 22.12.2008 and thereby a presumption to be drawn that the degree awarded prior to 2008 would be treated as recognized is misconceived.

7. Question of recognition and derecognition are two different aspects. A qualification is required to be recognized for the purpose of appointment by the Government for employment in their fold. The same may be derecognized by taking decision based on the report received relating to such institute’s performance. However, merely on the basis of facts stated by the District Education Officer about the qualification being not recognized can not mean the same to be a derecognizing order. In other words, a kpresumption can not be drawn that prior to it the qualification was recognized. The petitioners have not been able to place any document to show that the degrees awarded by Madhayamik Shiksha Parishad, Delhi, were ever recognized by the Government for employment.

8. From the perusal of the order it is also revealed that the State-authorities had made a query to the Education Department, Delhi, with regard to the veracity of the qualification/degrees awarded by Madhayamik Shiksha Parishad, Delhi. A reply has been received from the Education Department, Delhi, that the