Judgment :- 1. This is an interesting case where both the counsels were led to believe that the question involved will be decided by a Full Bench, because in W.A. Nos. 315 and 316/80, an order of reference was made by Ismail, Chief Justice. None the less, the fact remains that the appeals came to be disposed of by a Division Bench, since reported in VivekanandaMiddle School. Muthukrishnapuram, Kadayanallur v. The State of Tamil Nadu 1. At once I must point out that this Division Bench followed the earlier ruling of a Division Bench in an unreported case in W.A. No. 496/78 dated 6th September, 1979. While disagreeing with this ruling, a reterence was made to the Full Bench as pointed out earlier. It is very difficult for me at this stage to state as to how W.A. Nos. 315 and 316/80 came to be disposed of by the Division Bench in spite of a reference by another Division Bench when it came before the later Division Bench for disposal. 2. The facts which are relevant for the disposal of this writ petition are: The Management preferred an appeal under S. 44 of the Tamil Nadu Recognised Private Schools Regulations Act, 1973 (hereinafter referred to as the Act) to the Tribunal and in the instant case 1st Assistant Judge, City Civil Court, Madras. It may be stated that the appeal itself came to be presented pursuant to the order passed by this Court in W.P. No. 2366/80. This Court directed the petitioner to file an appeal to the Tribunal under S. 24 of the Act, subject to the conditions stated excepting as regards limitation. Pursuant thereto the petitioner preferred an appeal on 30th August, 1980, that is, within the time prescribed by this Court. On 6th September, 1980, the first respondent returned the appeal papers with the endorsement that a nemo of calculation for deposit under S. 44 must be filed and the correct amount may be specified with the dates from which and upto which and the dates and details of pay and allowances etc. Thereafter, the petitioner represented the appeal on 17th September, 1980 after compliance with an affidavit of undertaking to deposit the amount on the issue of a challan. Thereafter, the petitioner represented the appeal on 17th September, 1980 after compliance with an affidavit of undertaking to deposit the amount on the issue of a challan. Again on 22nd September, 1980, the papers were returned with the following comments: “Item 4 in the calculation memo it is not stated that the amount of Rs. 25-70 is arrived at as pay per day is correct. Item 5 the challan rough prepared with the correct amount and this appeal may be immediately represented with the challan for the depositing of the amount.” The petitioner is said to have complied with the said return on 26th September, 1980, and represented the appeal papers accompanied by a rough challan. On 30th September, 1980 the office of the first respondent required an application in support of the affidavit td permit the petitioner to deposit the amount in court. That was also complied with on 10th October, 1980 and the petitioner therein prayed that he may be permitted to deposit the amount to the account of S.R. No. 61465 pending numbering C.M.A. The application was also numbered as I.A. No. 17914/80 On that following endorsement was made by the 1st respondent office. “Application by appellant to number C.M.A. and issue challan for depositing Rs. 41,113. The above C.M.A. is against the orders, dated 5th April, 1980 of first respondent. As per order of High Court dated 18th August, 1980 in W.P. No. 2366/1980 appeal is in time presented on 30th August, 1980. As per provisions of S. 44 the Education Agency shall deposit with the Tribunal all arrears of pay and allowances due before the appeal is preferred. At the time of filing the C.M.A., the original order served on appellant was not filed and the appellant got it returned from the High Court and has now filed the original order. The memo of calculation is filed, Challan is also filed. An affidavit of appellant is also filed. Submitted for orders.” At that stage, the 2nd respondent, a teacher whose service was terminated by the petitioner, filed an objection to the issuance of the challan. The memo of calculation is filed, Challan is also filed. An affidavit of appellant is also filed. Submitted for orders.” At that stage, the 2nd respondent, a teacher whose service was terminated by the petitioner, filed an objection to the issuance of the challan. After hearing the petitioner and the second respondent as well as the Government Pleader, the Tribunal dismissed the petition for numbering the appeal and for issuance of challan, observing that the appellant has not made the deposit at the time of appeal and that a duty is cast on the appellant to file a challan along with the appeal to show that he is ready to pay the arrears. This order was passed on 31st January, 1981 and it is this order that is sought to be quashed in this writ proceeding. 3. I must at once point out that the issue turns upon the interpretation of S. 44 of the Act. I therefore reproduce the said provision. “44. Deposit with the Tribunal of pay and allowances of teachers and other persons employed in private schools in certain cases;— (1) If the appellate authority referred to in S. 23 has, in any appeal under that section against the dismissal or removal or reduction in rank or the termination otherwise of the appointment of any teacher or other person employed in any private school, made an order restoring such teacher or other employee as such no appeal against the order or such restoration shall be preferred in the Tribunal and no appeal (against the order of such restoration) which, under S. 25, stands transferred to the Tribunal shall be proceeded with by the Tribunal, unless the educational agency deposits with the Tribunal all arrears of pay and allowances due to such teacher or other person from the date of his dismissal or removal or reduction in rank or termination otherwise of his appointment upto the date of deposit, and continues to deposit the pay and allowances due to such teacher or other person until the termination of the proceedings before the Tribunal. (2) The deposit under Sub-S. (1) shall be made within such time and in such manner as may be prescribed. (2) The deposit under Sub-S. (1) shall be made within such time and in such manner as may be prescribed. (3) Where there is any dispute as to the amount to be deposited under Sub-S. (1), the Tribunal shall, on application made to it either by the educational agency or by such teacher or other person, and after making such inquiry as it deems fit, determine summarily the amount to be so deposited. (4) If the educational agency fails to deposit the amount as aforesaid, the Tribunal shall, unless the educational agency shows sufficient cause to the contrary, stop all further proceedings and make an order directing the educational agency to restore such teacher or other employee as such. (5) (a) Where, as a result of any final order made by the Tribunal at the conclusion of the proceedings before it, such amount of pay, allowances as becomes due to such teacher or other person shall be paid to him out of the amount deposited under Sub-S. (1). (b) If there is any balance left of the amount deposited under Sub-S. (1) after payment under Cl. (a) of the pay and allowances referred to in that clause, such balance or, where no amount becomes due as aforesaid to such teacher or other person, the whole of the amount deposed under Sub-S. (1), shall be referred to the educational agency.” No doubt according to the plain meaning of Sub-S. (1), no appeal shall be preferred to the Tribunal, unless the educational agency deposits into the Tribunal all arrears of pay and allowances due to such teacher, the 2nd respondent. It is this meaning that has prevailed upon the 1st respondent to dismiss the appeals, as is obvious from the following observation: “The Government has also made prescribed rules for the deposit and R. 30 clearly states that in case of appeal contemplated under Sub-S. (1) of S. 44 of the Act the Educational Agency shall deposit at the time of appeal with the Tribunal all arrears of Day and allowances due to such teacher, etc. Hence R. 30 clearly contemplates that the deposit shall be made at the time of the appeal. Hence R. 30 clearly contemplates that the deposit shall be made at the time of the appeal. Admittedly, the appellant has not made the deposit at the time of the appeal, though his Lordship specifically points out that the order in the Writ Petition does not dispense with the liability of the petitioner to deposit the amount as required under the said section.” In my considered view, a conjoint reading of S. 44(1) and (2) along with Rule 30 will clearly indicate that payment of arrears is not a sine qua nan for preferring an appeal to the 1st respondent. Sub-S. (2) states that the deposit under Sub-S (1) shall be made within such time and in such manner as may be prescribed obviously referring to R. 30. R 30 provides that in case of appeal contemplated in sub-S. 44 of the Act, the educational agency shall deposit, at the time of appeal with the Tribunal, all arrears of pay and allowances due to such teacher or other persons from the date of their dismissal or removal or reduction in ranks or termination of their appointments upto the date of deposit The provision has to be understood bearing in mind the objects that are sought to be achieved by this enactment. The Act is intended for the regulation of recognised private schools in the state of Tamil Nadu. The provisions of Ss. 22 and 23 will point out that they are intended to safeguard the interests of the teachers or other employees in a private school. Ii other words they are intended to protect the said employees dismissed arbitrarily or capriciously. It is therefore before passing an order of dismissal, removal or reduction in rank or suspension of a teacher or other person employed in a private school, the educational agency has to obtain permission of the competent authority. No doubt as against any adverse order passed by the competent authority an appeal is provided for. Secondly, a closes reading of Rule 30 also indicates that payment of arrears need not necessarily accompany the presentation of the appeal papers for a valid presentation, for, R. 30 visualises that the educational agency shall deposit all arrears of pay and allowances due to such teacher or other persons from the date of their dismissal or removal or reduction in ranks or termination of their appointments upto the date of deposit. It visualises two states, namely, (1) date of presentation of the appeal; and (2) the date of actual deposit of the arrears, otherwise the rule could have read “date of appeal” instead of “date of deposit.” Thus I am to reiterate that there is intrinsic indication in the Rule itself to suggest that the payment of arrears is not a must for valid presentation of the appeal under S. 44(1) of the Act. 4. Further, from a reading of Sub-S (2), it is manifest that it is not possible to make the payment along with the presentation of the appeal, for, it provides that the deposit shall be made within such time and in such manner as may be prescribed. Thus for a valid presentation of the appeal under S. 44 (1) of the Act, payment of arrears of pay and allowances need not necessarily accompany the appeal. The purport of S. 44(1) is that the mere tiling of an appeal shall not stand in the way of a teacher petting benefits under the order appealed against. It secures those arrears to be in deposit with the tribunal. It this is the object, the reasonable interpretation of S. 44(1) is that though there may be a valid presentation of the appeal, the same shall not be disposed of unless all the arrears are paid. Indeed, a Division Bench of this Court in VivekanandaMiddle Schoolv. The State of Tamil Nadu 1, has held as follows: “Having regard to the language used in S. 44(A) of the Act, the question of reopening the appeal proceedings on the management depositing the amount now, does not arise. In the event of the management failing to deposit the amounts provided in sub-S. (1) of S. 44, the Tribunal shall stop all further proceedings and make an order directing the management to reinstate the teacher. Since under S. 44(4) of the Act, the Tribunal is not only enjoined to stop all further proceedings but also to direct the management if reinstate the teacher, the said provisions cannot be construed as enabling the Tribunal to restore the proceedings on deposit being made at a subsequent stage. If the intention of the Legislature was different then there will be specific provision to the effect to enable the Tribunal to vacate its earlier order stopping all further proceedings and directing reinstatement of the teacher. If the intention of the Legislature was different then there will be specific provision to the effect to enable the Tribunal to vacate its earlier order stopping all further proceedings and directing reinstatement of the teacher. But so long as some specific provision of law is not there the Tribunal which makes a positive order directing the management to reinstate a teacher cannot recall that order and restore the appeal to file and proceed with the same on merits, if the management chooses to deposit the amount at a later point of time.” 5. Accordingly I find that the Tribunal has erred in dismissing the appeal in that it held that the payment of arrears of pay and allowances is sine qua non for the very presentation of the appeal. It is now brought to my notice that a sum of Rs. 45,963/70 was deposited in the City Civil Court, Madras Thus on this date, there is a strict compliance of S. 44(1). Then it would not be in the interest of the 2nd respondent himself to pursue this matter. On the other hand it is in his own interest, the appeal should be disposed of at the earlier possible time by the 1st respondent Tribunal. 6. In the result, the Writ petition is allowed. Ruse-Nisi is made absolute. The first respondent/Tribunal is directed to number the appeal and dispose of the same without imposing any further condition within one month from the date of receipt of the records. It is needless to state that it shall cause notice to the respective parties regarding the date of appearing. No costs. 7. The learned counsel for the 2nd respondent requests that some payment may be made as the teacher has to undertake long voyage in the legal battle before his claim is settled once and for all. In the circumstances, I find that such a request is genuine and reasonable. Accordingly I permit the 2nd respondent to withdraw a sum of Rs. 15,000 out of the deposit of Rs. 45,693/70.