HARI SWARUP,J. - (1.) THIS is plaintiff's appeal and arises out of a suit for a permanent injunction to restrain the defendants, namely, the Managing Committee of Sri Adarsh Intermediate College and its Manager, from giving effect to the notice terminating the plaintiff's services and also for an injunction to restrain them from the plain­tiff's functioning as a teacher.
(2.) THE plaintiff was appointed on temporary basis on July 8, 1958. The nature of appointment was described as 'temporary till trained hand is not available'. The appointment was subsequently approv­ed, it appears, by the Inspector of Schools on October 16. By a no­tice dated August 16, 1971 the Manager of the institution gave the plaintiff one month's notice terminating his services. It is against this order of termination that the plaintiff filed the suit. The plaintiff's case was that his services were governed by the Intermediate Education Act and they could not be terminated with­out prior approval of the District Inspector of Schools as required by Section 16-G (3) (a) of the Act. The defence taken in the suit was that as the plaintiff was not qualified to hold the cost, his appointment had become void on the amendment of the Intermediate Education Act and introduction therein of Section 16-E and Section 16-G on October 13, 1959. And, as the appointment became void, no prior approval of the Inspector of Schools was necessary for termi­nation of the service.
(3.) THE trial court held that the termination of service could not be made except with the prior approval of the District Inspector of Schools. It accordingly decreed the suit and issued the injunction prayed for by the plaintiff. An appeal was filed by the defendants. The first appellate court has allowed the appeal and dismissed the suit. According to the learned Civil Judge, the appointment itself had become void, because the plaintiff did not possess on the date of his appointment or on the date of the enforcement of Section 17-E of the Act the required qualification. Against this decree the plain­tiff has come up in appeal. Section 16-G (3) (a) provides: "No......teacher may be dis­charged or removed or dismissed from service or reduced in rank or subjected to any diminution in emoluments, or served with notice of termination of service except with the prior approval in writing of the Inspector". Admittedly the plaintiff was in service till the date of the notice of termination. It is further not denied that no prior approval of the Inspector had been taken for issuing the notice of termination of services. The order terminating the services was thus, ex jade, an order passed in contravention of the Intermediate Education Act. ;