The Government must respect and comply with the rules until they are altered or deleted, and domestic tribunals exercising quasi-judicial functions must follow the principles of natural justice. The court has the jurisdiction to interfere if the canons of natural justice are not complied with.

1. These writ petitions are all by Managers of Aided Elementary Schools in the Malabar area, with the exception of O.P. No. 617 of 1958, wherein a teacher has also joined as the 2nd petitioner. But at the time of hearing the learned Advocate of the petitioners in O.P. No. 617 of 1958 has agreed to treat the petition as one by the 1st petitioner alone, who is the Manager of the Upper Primary School, Payyoli. So that, all these petitions are by Managers of aided elementary schools and the question involved in them is regarding the effect of the Rules for the grant of recognition and aid to Elementary schools and the nature and scope of the powers of the Officers of the Educational Department and the government in hearing appeals against orders arising from those Rules.

2. In O.P. No. 467 of 1957 the 4th respondent, who was a teacher in the Nemmeni Aided Lower Primary School, Kollengode, tendered his resignation on 30th August, 1954, on the strength of which the Manager of the said school terminated his services. Thereafter, there was an enquiry by the Deputy Inspector, Kollengode Range, and also by the District Educational Officer, Palghat. The 4th respondent contended that he did not resign but, on the strength of an undated resignation letter obtained from him by the Manager at the time of his entertainment in service in the school, he was sent away, the Manager himself putting the date 30th August, 1954. On enquiry the District Educational Officer held that there was no sufficient ground to hold that the resignation letter was either false or invalid for the reason alleged by the 4th respondent. Thereupon the 4th respondent filed an appeal to the Divisional Inspector of Schools, Coimbatore, which was also rejected. Subsequently, on 18th November, 1957, the writ petitioner received communication of the proceedings of the District Educational Officer, Palghat, dated 14th November, 1957, enclosed a copy of the Government Proceedings dated 13th September, 1957. By these latter proceedings the Government had directed the petitioner to reinstate the 4th respondent in the school forthwith. The petitioner has filed the writ petition to quash the Government Proceedings marked Ext. C and the Proceedings of the District Educational Officer marked Ext. B.

3. In O.P. No. 62 of 1958 the Manager of the Panniackrussi West Elementary School, now called the Panniackurussi West Lower Primary School, prays for the quashing of the proceedings of the Director of Public Instruction, Trivandrum, dated 9th November 1957, evidenced by Ext. A, by a writ of certiorari or other appropriate writ. The petitioner alleges that in his school there were normally 5 classes and 5 teachers working therein and when an additional class was opened, the 4th respondent was appointed as a temporary teacher in the institution on 8th October, 1952. In the beginning of 1955, he was given notice of termination of his services from 1st June of the year, from which date the divisional class was not expected to function. The 4th respondent appealed to the District Educational Officer, Palghat and again to the Divisional Educational Officer, Kozhikode and both the appeal and the second appeal were dismissed. But the District Educational Officer, Palghat directed the writ petitioner to re-appoint the 4th respondent in the next vacancy that might arise in the institution. The petitioner did not comply with this direction and finally the District Educational Officer, Palghat, started proceedings against the petitioner under R.14 of the rules for the grant of recognition and aid to Elementary Schools. Notice was issued to the petitioner to show cause why action should not be taken against him under R.14 on the ground that the strength of the school was being deliberately kept low by him. The petitioner filed his explanations and finally on 22nd July 1957 the District Educational Officer, Palghat, framed three charges against the petitioner ; the charges being (1) disobed