ORDER

The petitioner has filed the present Writ Petition, to quash the impugned order of termination issued by the fifth respondent/Secretary, dated 05.02.2018 and to direct the respondents to reinstate him forthwith into service and allow him to continue as Physical Education Teacher in the fifth respondent School with all attendant benefits including full salary, allowances and continuity of service.

2.According to the petitioner, he was appointed as Physical Education Teacher in the fifth respondent School, after following due process of selection in the sanctioned post, with effect from 19.12.2016. The fifth respondent in order to fill up the post of Physical Education Teacher, that fell vacant on the retirement of M.Ramakrishnan, earlier incumbent, who attained the age of superannuation on 30.09.2015, obtained prior permission from the fourth respondent to fill up the vacancy and appointed the petitioner as Physical Education Teacher, vide order, dated 19.12.2016, as the petitioner was most suitable and meritorious candidate among others. The fourth respondent approved the appointment of the petitioner as Physical Education Teacher with effect from 19.12.2016, by proceedings, dated 02.05.2017. The fifth respondent School is the Higher Secondary School and only Middle School is aided School. High School and Higher Secondary School are self-finance School. Even though the petitioner was appointed in the Middle School, he was asked to maintain discipline among all the students in the School upto Higher Secondary level. The petitioner was conducting various sports and games and providing good training to the students and also maintained discipline among the students.

3.Further, according to the petitioner, the fifth respondent/Management demanded money for permitting him to continue in service. The petitioner hails from poor family and he could not afford to pay the illegal demands made by the fifth respondent/Management. The fifth respondent/Management did not open the Service Register even though the petitioner completed one year of service. When the petitioner requested the fifth respondent/Management to open his Service Register, the fifth respondent/Management did not permit the petitioner to sign the attendance register on 04.01.2018 and on subsequent dates. The fifth respondent removed the pages of attendance register where the petitioner singed on 02.01.2018 and 03.01.2018. The petitioner was going to School daily, but he was not permitted to sign the attendance register and discharge his duties. After Pongal Holidays, when the petitioner went to the School on 17.01.2018, the fifth respondent/Management did not permit the petitioner to enter in the School. The petitioner gave complaint to the third respondent on 18.01.2018 and again on 01.02.2018. The third respondent has not conducted any enquiry. While so, when the petitioner went to the fifth respondent School on 08.02.2018, the fifth respondent served the impugned order, dated 05.02.2018, stating that the petitioner was relieved from the School with effect from 05.02.2018, as per the decisions of the School Committee. Challenging the same, the petitioner has come out with the present Writ Petition.

4.The learned Senior Counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner was appointed in a sanctioned post and his appointment was approved by the fourth respondent. The fifth respondent, without any notice and without any reason, arbitrarily relieved the petitioner from service. The fifth respondent has not obtained prior permission from the authorities as per the mandatory provision of Section 22 of the Tamil Nadu Recognised Private Schools (Regulation) Act, 1973. The impugned order is invalid, illegal and non-est in law. The fourth respondent called the petitioner for enquiry on 14.02.2018. The petitioner appeared and explained about the malafide on the part of the fifth respondent School in terminating him from service. According to the petitioner, the