S. H. SHETH, J. ( 1 ) ). Respondent No. 1 was employed by the petitioners in their school as a Drawing Teacher. He joined service on 21st Novemher 1955. On 28th January 1976 his service was terminated for want work which could be assigned to him. An application was made to the Secondary Education Tribunal by respondent No. 1. The Tribunal by its order dated 19th March 1976 confirmed the termination of respondent No. 1s employment but ordered the petitioners to pay to respondent No. 1 compensation amounting to his 21 months salary. That order was made under Regulation 33 framed by the State Government under sec. 54 read with sec. 53 of the Gujarat Secondary Education Act 1972 The petitioners challenge in this petition that order. ( 2 ) MR. Vyas who appears on behalf of the petitioners has raised two contentions:- (1) Regulation 33 is ultra vires sec. 54 of the Act. (2) Respondent No. 1 was not a secondary teacher from 1955 to 1965 and therefore he was not entitled to compensation for that period under Regulation 33. ( 3 ) BEFORE we proceed to examine these two contentions which Mr. Vyas has raised it is necessary to state that the computation of compensation made by the Tribunal under Regulation 33 is not disputed or challenged. Regulation 33 reads as follows:-"where service of a permanent employee is terminated by the management in accordance with the provisions of sec. 36 such employee shall be entitled to compensation. (a) equal to 6 months salary including allowance if the employee has put in service in the school for a period not exceeding five years and; (b) equal to 6 months salary including allowances for the first five years and a months salary for every year of the period exceeding five years if the employee has put in service in the school for a period exceeding five years". It is not necessary for the purpose of this decision to reproduce subregulation (2) of Regulation 33 which applies to termination of services of a temporary teacher. The question which has been raised by Mr. Vyas before us is that such a regulation casting an obligation upon the management of a secondary school to pay compensation to a teacher whose services have been terminated cannot be made by the State Government under the Act. The question which has been raised by Mr. Vyas before us is that such a regulation casting an obligation upon the management of a secondary school to pay compensation to a teacher whose services have been terminated cannot be made by the State Government under the Act. Power to make Regulations has been conferred under sec. 53 upon the Gujarat Secondary Education Board; established under sec. 3. Sec. 54 however provides as follows:- "notwithstanding anything contained in sec. 53 the first regulations shall be made by the State Government and they shall continue to be in force until new regulations are duly made and sectioned under that section". It is not in dispute that the Regulation 33 is a part of the first regulations made by the State Government under sec. 54. Reading secs. 53 and 54 together it is clear that for the purpose of making the first regulations the State Government could exercise under sec. 54 the powers conferred upon the Gujarat Secondary Education Board under sec. 53. Sub-sec. (1) of sec. 53 provides as follows:-"the Board may make regulations for the purpose of carrying into effect the provisions of this Act". This is a general regulation-making power which has been conferred upon the Board under sec. 53 and therefore upon the State Government under sec. 54 so far as the first regulations are concerned. Sub-sec. (2) of sec. 53 provides as follows:-"in particular and without prejudice to the generality of the foregoing power such regulations may provide for all or any of the following matters namely : -. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . (L) any other matter which is to be or may be prescribed under this Act. Sec. 2 (n) defines the expression prescribed in the following terms prescribed means prescribed by regulations. It is clear therefore that something can be prescribed by the State Government in the first regulations for the first time. Indeed it must not be inconsistent with or contrary to the provisions of the Act. The argument which Mr. Vyas has raised is that there must be a pre-existing Regulation under which liability to pay compensation to a teacher whose services have been terminated must be prescribed. Only then the question of paying a particular amount of compensation to a teacher whose services have been terminated arises. The argument which Mr. Vyas has raised is that there must be a pre-existing Regulation under which liability to pay compensation to a teacher whose services have been terminated must be prescribed. Only then the question of paying a particular amount of compensation to a teacher whose services have been terminated arises. We are not impressed by the argument which Mr. Vyas has raised. Under sub-sec. (1) of sec. 53 and clause (L) sec. 53 (2) something which is incidental to a subject with which the Act has dealt can be directly prescribed. Sec. 35 provides for termination of services of a teacher. It inter alia provides as follows:- (1) No person who is appointed as a head-master a teacher or a member of non teaching staff of a registered private secondary school shall be dismissed or remove or reduced in rank nor shall his service be otherwise terminated by the manage until (a) he has been given by the manager a reasonable opportunity of showing cause against the action proposed to be taken in regard to him and (b) the action proposed to be taken in regard to him has been approved in writing by an officer authorised in this behalf by the Board:- provided that nothing in this sub-section shall apply to any person who is appointed for a temporary period only. It is not necessary to reproduce sub-secs. (2) (3) (4) and (5) of sec. because they have no relevance to the present case. It is clear that subject to the conditions specified in sub-sec. (1) the services of a teacher can be terminated. No doubt is left in our minds after reading sub-sec. (1) of sec. 36 that the termination of services of a teacher contemplated by sub-sec. (1) of sec. 36 is contradistinguished from his dismissal or removal or reduction in rank for misconduct or for similar other reason. Where there is a simple termination of services as in the instant case does the State Government under sec. 54 read with sec. 53 have power to frame a regulation for payment of compensation to a teacher whose service have been terminated? We find such a power in sub-sec. (1) of sec. 53 and clause (L) of sub-sec. (2) of sec. 53 read with sec. 54 read with sec. 53 have power to frame a regulation for payment of compensation to a teacher whose service have been terminated? We find such a power in sub-sec. (1) of sec. 53 and clause (L) of sub-sec. (2) of sec. 53 read with sec. 36 because payment of compensation to a teacher whose services have been terminated simpliciter is a matter incidental to the termination of his services. ( 4 ) IT is also necessary in this behalf to turn to sec. 17 which lays down the powers and duties of the Secondary Education Board. Claus (26) of sec. 17 specifies the following subject for the Gujarat Secondary Education Board:- to lay down qualifications methods of selection and conditions of appointment promotion and termination of employment and rules for conduct and discipline of the headmaster and the teaching and non-teaching staff of registered private secondary schools. It is clear therefore that the Gujarat Secondary Education Board has the power under sec. 17 (26) to lay down amongst others conditions of termination of employment. Whether the termination simpliciter of the services of a teacher shall be subject to payment of compensation or not is a matter which falls within the jurisdiction of the Gujarat Secondary Education Board under sec. 17 (26) of the Act. Our attention has been invited by Mr. Mehta to clauses (43) and (46) of sec. 17. Clause (43) provides as follows:- to make regulations for purposes of carrying into effect the provisions of this Act. When clause (43) and Clause (26) of sec. 17 are read together no doubt is left in our minds that Gujarat Secondary Education Board has the power to make regulations prescribing conditions subject to which a teachers employment may be terminated. That power by virtue of sec. 54 can be exercised by the State Government while making the first regulations. Clause 146) of sec 17 confers upon the Gujarat Secondary Education Board residuary power to do all such other acts and things as may be necessary to carry out the purposes of the Act. Clauses (26) and (43) make a clear provision in respect of the subject-matter in controversy before us. It is not necessary to place reliance upon clause (46) of sec. 17. ( 5 ) WE are therefore of the opinion that under sec. 53 read with sec. 54 sec. 36 sec. 17 (26) and sec. Clauses (26) and (43) make a clear provision in respect of the subject-matter in controversy before us. It is not necessary to place reliance upon clause (46) of sec. 17. ( 5 ) WE are therefore of the opinion that under sec. 53 read with sec. 54 sec. 36 sec. 17 (26) and sec. 17 (43) the State Government had the power to make regulation 33. Secondly the regulation is consistent with sec. 17 (26) and sec. 17 (43 ). Therefore in our opinion it is valid and is not hit by any provision of the Gujarat Secondary Education Act 1972 Nor did the State Government suffer from want of power in making that regulation. The first contention raised by Mr. Vyas therefore fails and is rejected. Petition dismissed. .