The Government's unilateral cancellation of the earlier permission to open/upgrade schools was without jurisdiction and violated the principles of natural justice.

1. A question of jurisdiction and the application of the principles of natural justice mainly arise for determination in all these appeals where the appellants challenge the decisions of a learned single judge upholding a Government Order unilaterally cancelling an earlier permission granted to them to open/upgrade unaided recognised Schools in certain specified areas.

2. The Kerala Education Act allows private Schools to be recognised by the Government. These "recognised schools" as defined under the Act, do not receive any financial aid from the Government, but can impart instructions only according to the prescribed curriculum of studies and can have recognised standards of divisions of classes also only in accordance with the provisions of the Act. They are different from "aided schools" where the teachers and staff appointed by the private management are paid by the State and the managements receive substantial aid towards maintenance grant. We are concerned in these appeals only with recognised schools and not with aided schools or Government or Departmental schools.

3. Schools require to be recognised as otherwise the students studying in these schools will not be permitted to sit for the examinations conducted by the State and they will not be eligible to avail of the opportunities for higher education or to enter public service. Recognition of school by the State is thus an important facet in the establishment of educational institutions.

4. On 6th March, 1986, the Director of Public Instruction published a list of areas indicating where new unaided recognised schools of any or all grades are to be opened and existing lower primary schools or upper primary schools or both are to be upgraded inviting objections or representations against such list. The educational authorities conducted the necessary enquiries, considered the objections/representations and sent their reports with their views on the questions raised, to the Director. The Director, in his turn, considered the relevant aspects and finalised the list and sent his recommendation to the Government. The Government approved the list with some modifications. After the Government's approval, the Director published on 24th June, 1986 in the gazette "the final list of areas where new unaided recognised High Schools/Upper Primary Schools/Lower Primary Schools are to be opened or existing unaided L. P. Schools/ Upper Primary Schools are to be upgraded in the year 1986-87". The Government included 122 areas in this list where the educational need required new schools or where existing schools are to be upgraded (Ext. P2 in OP No. 4515 of 1987).

5. The areas where recognised schools have to be established/ upgraded having been thus ascertained and identified, the Director issued a Notification inviting applications for opening new schools or upgrading old schools. These applications are considered as provided in the Act and the Government take a final decision in the matter and a Notification is published showing the names of persons who are permitted to open new schools or upgrade existing schools. A Notification was issued and published in these cases on 4th February 1987 and the appellants have been given permission to open schools (Ext. P4 in O. P. No. 4515 of 1987). In fact, the Government sanctioned opening/ upgrading of 36 Lower Primary Schools, 36 Upper Primary Schools and 19 High Schools totalling 91 schools as per this order. This was stayed by the Government itself by order dated 23rd February, 1987 and eventually cancelled by another order dated 19th May, 1987, to be referred to as Ext. P7 hereafter. The challenge is directed against this last order of cancellation and 49 out of the 91 applicants who were earlier granted the permission figure as the appellants.

6. Ext. P7 is challenged on four grounds, (a) that it was issued without jurisdiction; (b) that it was made violating all principles of natural justice; (c) that there was no application of th