1. The question for consideration is whether Ext. P-9 order passed by the Director of Public Instruction is vitiated by an error of law apparent on the face of the record and whether the 1st petitioner is entitled to maintain the appointment of the 2nd petitioner as the Headmistress of the school. It is not necessary to enter into an elaborate discussion of the facts which led up to Ext. P-9 order. Suffice it for me to say that in a previous writ petition filed in this Court, namely O.P. No. 1883 of 1962 this Court directed the Director of Public Instruction to consider the appeal petition filed by the 2nd respondent and to pass the appropriate order.

2. On the retirement of the permanent undergraduate headmaster of the school in question, the D.E.O. sanctioned by Ext. P-1 order the creation of a graduate headmaster's post. By Ext. P-2 order, the graduate headmaster's post was made permanent. The 2nd respondent was the seniormost teacher in the school. But he was not a graduate. Sri. George Koshi, a junior to the 2nd respondent was appointed as the headmaster on 1-4-1960. Against this the 2nd respondent filed an appeal to the District Educational Officer. The D.E.O. appr