JUDGMENT S.B. Sanyal, J. This writ petition has been referred to Division Bench for hearing, as one of the points involved is the nature of power exercisable by the Chairman under section 18(2) of the Bihar Secondary Education Board Act, 1976 (Act 25 of 1976, hereinafter to be referred to as ‘the Act’) 2. In this writ petition, the petitioner seeks quashing of Annexure 5' dated 9.8.1980, an order passed by the Chairman of the Bihar Secondary Education Board (hereinafter to be referred to as 'the Board'), in exercise of the powers conferred under section 18(2) of the Act, setting aside the order of the Area Education Officer appointing the petitioner as a Clerk of Bakshi High School, Husuinabad. 3. Consequent upon an advertisement, the petitioner, who is a graduate with diploma in typing and respondent no. 7, who is a matriculate with elementary mathematics, applied for the post of a Clerk in the said school. A written test was held by the Ad hoc Managing Committee. The Managing Committee of the School, on the basis of the written test, educational qualification and typing ability, prepared a panel of persons in order of merit. The petitioner was placed as number one in the said panel and respondent no. 7 was placed as number two. The Managing Committee thereafter sent the panel for approval to the Area Education Officer, who is said to be authorised under section 40 (2) of the Act, by the Board, to make the appointment. The Area Education Officer appointed petitioner as a Clerk of the school on 3.11.1979 (vide Annexure 3'). The petitioner joined the school on 8.11.1979. 4. Respondent No.7 being aggrieved by the order of appointment filed an application before the District Education Officer for setting aside the appointment. The District Education Officer rejected the prayer of respondent no. 7 (vide Annexure ‘4’). Respondent No. 7 thereafter moved the Chairman under section 19 of the Act. The Chairman, after having afforded opportunity to both the sides having heard their respective contentions, set aside the appointment (vide Annexure 5') on 9.8.1980. 5. The District Education Officer rejected the prayer of respondent no. 7 (vide Annexure ‘4’). Respondent No. 7 thereafter moved the Chairman under section 19 of the Act. The Chairman, after having afforded opportunity to both the sides having heard their respective contentions, set aside the appointment (vide Annexure 5') on 9.8.1980. 5. The Board has laid down by its resolution dated 26.1.1978 (Annexure 6') tile following qualifications for the appointment of a Clerk in the School :- ^^¼[k½ fu;qfDr ds fy;s U;wure ;ksX;rk fuEu izdkj gksxh %& ¼1½ lkekU; mEehnokjksa ds fy;s f}rh; Js.kh esa eSfVªd ikl ¼izkFkfedh vFkok okf.kT; xf.kr ds lkFk½A ¼2½ gfjtu ,oa vkfnoklh mEehnokjksa ds fy;s r`rh; Js.kh esa eSfVªd ikl ¼izkFkfed vFkok okf.kT; xf.kr ds lkFk½A ¼3½ mPprj ;ksX;rk okys mEehnokjksa ds fy;s eSfVªd esa f}rh; Js.kh ds ikl gksuk vfuok;Z ugha ekuk tk;sxkA ¼x½ lk{kkRdkj esa mEehnokjksa dk ewY;kadu fuEu izdkj ls fd;k tk;sxk %& ‘kS{kf.kd ;ksX;rk 80 izfr’kr( lqys[k 10 izfr’kr] Vad.k ds ikfjnf’kZrk 10 izfr’kr izca/k dkfj.kh lfefr lk{kkRdkj ds okn izkFkfedrk ds vk/kkj ij nks mEehnokjksa ds uke iw.kZ lwpuk ds lkFk ,oa vuq’kalk ds lkFk cksMZ }kjk izkf/kd`r inkf/kdkjh dks fu;qfDr ds fy;s Hkstsxh rFkk mDr izkf/kd`r inkf/kdkjh lkekU;r% izFke mEehnokj dh fu;qfDr djsxh ijarq ;fn fdlh dkj.ko’k izkf/kd`r inkf/kdkjh f}rh; mEehnokj dh fu;qfDr djs rks izFke mEehnokj dh fu;qfDr ugha djus dk dkj.k izca/k lfefr dks rqjar lalwfpr djsxkA ;g Hkh fu.kZ; fy;k x;k fd mi;qZDr ladYi dh lwpuk dkfeZd foHkkx dks nh tk;s vkSj dkfeZd foHkkx ds vuqeksnu dh izR;k’kk esa bl fu.kZ; ds vuqlkj dke izkjaHk fd;k tk;s( ;g fu.kZ; gqvk gS fd dkfeZd foHkkx dk /;ku bl ckr dh vksj vkd`”V fd;k tk;s fd pwafd fo|ky; ds fyfid ls vPNh gLrfyfi ,oa Vad.k dk Kku visf[kr gS] blfy;s dsoy fofHkUu ijh{kkvksa esa izkIrkad ds vk/kkj ij mPp fo|ky;ksa ds fy;s fyfid dk p;u O;kogkfjd ugha gksxkA** 6. Mr. Thakur Prasad appearing for the petitioner urged that the appointment of the petitioner is in absolute consonance with the requirement laid down in Annexure 6' (extracted above) and. therefore, the Chairman acted illegally and without jurisdiction in setting aside his appointment on pure misconstruction of tile guide line provided by the Board. Alternatively he argued that the resolution dated 26th of January, 1978, having not been approved by the State Government, as required under section 64 of the Act, it is inoperative. therefore, the Chairman acted illegally and without jurisdiction in setting aside his appointment on pure misconstruction of tile guide line provided by the Board. Alternatively he argued that the resolution dated 26th of January, 1978, having not been approved by the State Government, as required under section 64 of the Act, it is inoperative. The requirement, as laid down in prior resolution of the Board and approved by the Government, will apply and the said resolutions are also saved under section 67(2) (g) (iii) of the Act. Learned counsel's second contention is that the Chairman has acted as an appellate court, even though he is not vested with said power, as such the order impugned is ultra vires and is in excess of jurisdiction. Learned counsel's further submission is that the school has been taken over on 11.8.1980 by the Government and the services of the petitioner stand transferred to the Government as a consequence of the take over in view of section 4 of Bihar non-govt. Secondary School (Taking over of management and Control) Act, as such affirmation at the order contained in Annexure 5' would be terminating the services of a Government servant at the behest of the Chairman of the Board. The last submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner is, as the petitioner is continuing in service for about four years, his removal would be too harsh and in humanitarian. 7. Learned counsel for respondent no. 7, on the other hand, contended that the order of appointment (Annexure 3') itself is illegal and without jurisdiction, as the petitioner did not possess the minimum qualification, i.e., he did not pass matriculation examination with elementary or commercial mathematics. Setting aside of the order of Chairman will amount to restoration of the illegal order of appointment, which the Court should refrain from doing under its discretionary jurisdiction. He further contended that the Chairman was wholly justified to interfere in exercise of the powers conferred under section 18(2) of the Act, as he found that there was a breach of the rules for appointment of a clerk. The Chairman possesses all necessary powers to enforce the compliance of rules, regulations etc. He also contended that the Area Education Officer Was not authorised under section 40(2) of the Act, and this power vested in the Sub-divisional Education Officer. In support of his submission a written argument has also been filed. The Chairman possesses all necessary powers to enforce the compliance of rules, regulations etc. He also contended that the Area Education Officer Was not authorised under section 40(2) of the Act, and this power vested in the Sub-divisional Education Officer. In support of his submission a written argument has also been filed. 8. I will first take up the question as to whether the petitioner had the requisite minimum qualification for being appointed as a clerk in the school. If it is found that the petitioner fulfils the requirement as envisaged under Annexure 6' all other question, would pale into insignificance. As extracted above, clause (1) of (Kh) lays down that a candidate for appointment of a clerk must have passed the Matriculation Examination in 2nd Division and within bracket it is further stated-Prathamik Athba Banijya Ganit Ke Sath. In clause (ii) there is a relaxation of the division obtained by a Harijan candidate, but the passing of the said examination along with Elementary or Commercial Math, continues. The (iii) clause lays down that those who possess higher educational qualification in their case passing of Matriculation Examination in 2nd Division is not mandatory. Serial (Ga) lays down guidelines and marking in the interview. It provides 80 per cent marks for educational qualification, 10 per cent marks for good handwriting and the rest 10 per cent for typing abilities. It further lays down that the committee should prepare a list and refer it to the person authorised by the Board to make appointment and if in the event the authorised authority is of the opinion that the second candidate should be preferred, reasons therefor has to be stated. This is allowed by an important sub-paragraph at to whom preference will be given and what is the desirability in a candidate expecting appointment. It say that attention of the Managing Committee is drawn to the fact that since in the case of clerk good handwriting and typing ability is desirable, therefore, marks obtained by different candidates, in different examinations, is not very relevant. 9. The argument that the person who are higher qualified must also pass matriculation examination with elementary and commercial math, is not convincing. Clause (i) comprise one sentence only in spite of the bracket. It is the minimum qualification for candidate, who are matriculate only. 9. The argument that the person who are higher qualified must also pass matriculation examination with elementary and commercial math, is not convincing. Clause (i) comprise one sentence only in spite of the bracket. It is the minimum qualification for candidate, who are matriculate only. To put it otherwise, a candidate who bas passed matriculation, in 1st division without elementary and commercial math, shall not be eligible for appointment. Clause (i) bas no application for candidates possessing higher qualification. No special significance can be attached to the bracket, as Lord Esher M.R. observed in the case of Duke of Devonshtre Vs. O’con-nor1 an Act, of Parliament there are no such things as brackets any more thin there are such things as stops”. It is permissable to road a clause with brackets removed, “It appears to be established that Punctuation marks are not to be treated as forming part of a statute and that they must, therefore, be disregarded for the purpose of construing it” (Halsbury Volume 44 4th editon2 Para 820), however some Judges and low Lords in England have drifted a little from the said position b observing “not to take account of Punctuation disregards the reality” Hanlen Vs. Law Society, Lord Lowry. (H.L.) In substance, the passing of Elementary Math and Commercial Math. At the Matriculation Examination are meant to be the minimum qualification fore Matriculate candidates desiring to be appointed as a clerk. In my opinion, there has been a wholesale exemption of the minimum qualification as enumerated in Khe (i) and (ii) for candidates who are higher qualified. If it was desired that Elementary Math, or Commercial Math. at the Matriculation stage be also the minimum requirement for candidates who are higher quali9fied there would have been a reference to it in clause (iii) as well. I feel fortified in the said interpretation, as in last part of clause (Ga) importance and stress has been laid in the capability of a candidate who writes good hand and possesses typing ability. Marks obtained in higher examinations have been relaxed in favour of such candidates. It may be remembered that the petitioner is not only a graduate but he is also a holder of diploma in typewriting. In that view of the matter, according to me, the petitioner fulfills all the requirement as laid down in Annexure ‘6’ for being appointed as a clerk. 10. It may be remembered that the petitioner is not only a graduate but he is also a holder of diploma in typewriting. In that view of the matter, according to me, the petitioner fulfills all the requirement as laid down in Annexure ‘6’ for being appointed as a clerk. 10. In this connection I may also refer to 8(1)(Kha) of the Rules of 1983, known as “Bihar Rajyakrit Madhyamik Viayalaya Sevasbart (Service Condition)". The minimum qualification required to be appointed as a clerk in a taken-over school is only Matric pass, with preference to a candidate possessing typing ability. The school having been taken over the petitioner completely fulfils all the requirements as required for being appointed as a clerk in a Government school. 11. The next question that comes up for consideration is, even assuming there be some scope of argument as to whether the petitioner completely fulfil1ed the criteria laid down in Annexure 6', was the Chairman empowered to substitute his own decision, for the one• arrived at by the Managing Committee and the person authorised by the Board to make the appointment. This takes me to the question as to the nature of power conferred on the Chairman under section 18 of the Act. On a bare perusal of the section it is manifest that the power exercisable is supervisory. He is the Chief Executive o-f the Board. The duty cast upon him is to ensure rules and the regulations are being adhered to, and for carrying out the said duty he has been conferred with all necessary powers. The, Act, provides for no appeal and revision. Power of appeal, review, revision are creatures of statutes. Right of appeal is a vested right. The remedy aforesaid confer on a party the right to ask the superior court and/or superior authority to set aside or revise a decision of a subordinate Court or authority. It is a right of entering the superior court and invoking its aid and interference to redress the error of the Court below. Two things which arc required to constitute appellate jurisdiction I are the existence of the relation of superior and inferior Court and the power on the part of the former to review decision of the latter. It is a right of entering the superior court and invoking its aid and interference to redress the error of the Court below. Two things which arc required to constitute appellate jurisdiction I are the existence of the relation of superior and inferior Court and the power on the part of the former to review decision of the latter. An appeal is a process of civil law origin and removes a cause entirely subjecting the fact as well as the law to a review and a retrial. (See Shankar V. Krishna4 and Ganga Bai V. Vijay Kumar5. 12. The power of superintendence and/or supervision on the other hand, do not clothe the superior authority with unlimited prerogative to correct all species of hardship or wrong decisions. It must be restricted to cases of grave dereliction of duty and flagrant abuse of fundamental principles of law or justice. While considering the scope of Article 227 which conferred power of superintendence in the High Court over any Court or Tribunal, it was observed that "The High Court cannot in exercise of its power un1er the section assume appellate powers to correct every mistake of law." (See D.N. Banarjee Vs. M.R. Mukherjee6, Satyanarain Vs. Malikarjun7. In the absence of statutory provision for appeal, errors of law and fact committed by an administrative body do not, in general, afford grounds for relief unless they have caused it to go outside its jurisdiction or to misconceive the scope of its discretionary powers, or to make a decision based upon findings of fact manifestly lacking evidential support, or unless an error of law is disclosed by the "record" of the determination issued by it. (See Judicial Review of Administrative Action-De Smith', Fourth Edition' at Page 27). 13. Section 18(2) of the Act, does not give the Chairman a roving commission either in the direction of stamping with approval the proceedings of a lower authority or in the direction of questioning about and looking to see if possibly under a fair record, there lies some trace of possible error. A right to appeal by a party aggrieved is to be construed as empowering the appellate court to substitute its own opinion for the opinion of the authority which made the decision. This is not the kind of power which has been conferred upon the Chairman under section 18(2) of the Act. A right to appeal by a party aggrieved is to be construed as empowering the appellate court to substitute its own opinion for the opinion of the authority which made the decision. This is not the kind of power which has been conferred upon the Chairman under section 18(2) of the Act. However, he possesses the power for implementation and compliance of the acts, rule and regulations. In cases of dereliction of duty, flagrant abuse of the principles of law and fact, acts f grave injustice the Chairman’s interference may be called for. This power is not to be exercised by the Chairman to substitute its own judgment whether on a question of law or facts in place that of the subordinate authority. In the instant case the Chairman has assumed appellate power and treating the proceedings brought before it as an appeal Ho has substituted his own decision for the decision or the lower authority and as such the Order contained in Annexure 5' is illegal and in excess of jurisdiction. 14. In support of the contention of the respondent that the Sub-divisional Education Officer was the only person authorised under section 40(2) of the Act, to make the appointment, no materials have been placed before us. There is no mention of this point even in the written argument. This was also not the point canvassed before the Chairman. On the contrary there is a presumption that all official acts have been regularly performed. This submission is, therefore, rejected. 15. There is an humanitarian aspect also. The petitioner was appointed in usual course of business. He has been working since 1979. Today his services stand transferred to Government. He possesses the prescribed qualification for being appointed as a clerk in a Government School. He has earned increment in salary. There is no complaint about his ability or efficiency. The power we exercise in writ jurisdiction is discretionary and, therefore, the Court "is not bound to tilt at every-approach found not in consonance or conformity with law but the interference may have a deleterious effect on the parties involved in the dispute. Laws cannot be interpreted and enforced from their effect on human beings for whom the laws are meant. No doubt, rule of law must prevail but as is often said "rule of law must run akin to rule of life (See Municipal Board Pratapgarh V. Mahendra Singh)8. Laws cannot be interpreted and enforced from their effect on human beings for whom the laws are meant. No doubt, rule of law must prevail but as is often said "rule of law must run akin to rule of life (See Municipal Board Pratapgarh V. Mahendra Singh)8. To dislodge the petitioner from service today, who has worked for such a long time would be in the words of Supreme Court "equity may stand massacred”. 16. However, in the instant case, the appointment of the petitioner suffers from no illegality or vice whatsoever. 17. In the result, the petition is allowed and Annexure ‘5’ is quashed, but there will be no order as to costs. P.S. Sahay, J. I agree. Application allowed.