KELAVANI MANDAL VANKIA Vs. STATE OF GUJARAT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Rule. Learned Advocate Mr. Roshan Desai appears and waives service of rule on behalf of Respondent No. 1. Mr. Soni, learned advocate appears and waives service of rule on behalf of respondent No. 2. Mr. Bhatt, learned advocate appears and waives service of rule on behalf of respondent No. 3. At the request of the learned counsel appearing for the respective parties, the matter is immediately heard for disposal.

(2.) The grievance of the petitioner is that without hearing the petitioner, registration of the petitioner school has been cancelled by invoking the provisions of Sec. 31(10) of the Gujarat Secondary Education Act, 1972 (hereinafter referred to as "the Act"). According to the petitioner, registration was granted to the petitioner school under Sec. 31(1) of the Act and that has been cancelled by the State Government without hearing the petitioner.

(3.) Admittedly, before making of the impugned order dated 28th August, 1997 at Annexure "F" to the petition by which the order of the Board dated 30th June, 1997 was set aside, no hearing was given to the petitioner. Learned counsel appearing for the respondents do not dispute that the hearing was required to be given before making any order under Sec. 31(10) of the Act. Since the impugned order is contrary to the principles of natural justice, it cannot be sustained and is hereby set aside. The appellate authority can proceed de novo after hearing all the concerned parties and may make afresh order in accordance with law. The learned counsel appearing for the appellate authority states that the matter will be heard and decided within two months. Needless to say that if any order is made against any of the parties, the aggrieved party can take recourse to law. It will be open for both the sides to take up their contention including on the question of maintainability of appeal before the appellate authority. Rule is made absolute accordingly with no order as to costs.