Judgment S. B. Sinha, J. 1. -these applications raise a question as to whether the orders passed by the District Superintendent of Education, Purnes, whereby and whereunder the promotions givec to the Assistant teachers working in different Schools in the district of Purnea were cancelled, aregvalid, 2. In view of the points involved in the case, it fa not necessary to state the fact of the matter of each case in great details. A counter-affidavit, inter alia, has been filed in C. W. J. C. No.4284 of 1991. The representative matrix of facts of this case which require notice are as follows ; the petitioners were appointed as Assistant teachers by the orders of the District Superintendent of Education. The petitioners were either granted I. A. trained scale of pay or B. A. trained scale of pay and were posted on vacant posts allegedly in terms of the recommendations of the District Education Establishment Committee. The petitioners have contended that they were eligible to be promoted to the said posts, but, by reason of the impugned orders, the said orders of promotion have been cancelled. According to the petitioners, the impugned orders are illegal and without jurisdiction as prior to passing thereof they were not given an opportunity of being heard. A counter-affidavit has been filed on behalf of Respondent No.3 wherein, inter alia. It has been contended that the orders of promotion to hundreds of teachers were illegal, issued by one Sri deo Chandra Jha purported to be on the recommendations of the District Education Establishment Committee, although, in fact, no such recommendations had been made. It has further been contended that Sri Deo Chandra Jha had passed the said orders of promotion in contravention of the relevant rules. It has also been contended that in some cases it was found that the cases of other teachers who were seniors to the petitioners were not considered for promotion at all. It has further been contended that even issuance of such letters do not find place in the issue registets maintained in the office of the District Superintendent of education nor had they been counter-signed by the deputy Development Commissioners as is required in law. 3. Mr. Kamlesh Jain, learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners raised various contentions in support of her submission. 3. Mr. Kamlesh Jain, learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners raised various contentions in support of her submission. Learned counsel submitted that as no notice had been issued to the petitioners prior to the issuance of the said orders, the same are wholly illegal and without jurisdiction. Learned Counsel in this connection has relied upon a decisions of the Supreme Court in Sharwan Kumar Jha and others V/s. State of Bihar and others, AIR 1991 SC 309 . 4. Learned Counsel further drew our attention to the some orders passed by this Court, where similar orders have been set aside and the matters have been remitted back for reconsideration. 5. Learned Counsel further submitted that, in fact, no seniority list has been prepared and thus, the question of there being a seniority list before the District Education Establishment Committee for the purpose considering the inter se seniority of the concerned teachers does not arise. Learned counsel has pointed out with reference to Annexure-6 of C. W. I. C.4713 of 1991. which is a letter dated 12-1-1991 addressed to all Regional Education officers, Block Education Extension Officers and all Head-masters of the Middle Schools, whereby service books, testimonials and other records of the concerned teachers have been called for from all concerned by the District superintendent of Education, Purnea for preparation of the gradation list. Learned Counsel, therefore, submitted that as no gradation list has yet been prepared, the question of supersession of the senior teachers does not arise. It next contended that contrary to the policy decisions of the State of Bihar only Science teachers have been promoted, although 50% Arts teachers were to be promoted and 50% Science teachers were to be promoted in the higher scales of pay. It was further contended that it is wrong to contend that counter-signature of the Deputy Development Commissioner is required to be obtained before issuing the orders of promotion in terms of any Rules whatsoever. It was further submitted that it is also not correct to say that orders of promotion have been passed beyond the sanctioned strength. 6. Ms. It was further contended that it is wrong to contend that counter-signature of the Deputy Development Commissioner is required to be obtained before issuing the orders of promotion in terms of any Rules whatsoever. It was further submitted that it is also not correct to say that orders of promotion have been passed beyond the sanctioned strength. 6. Ms. Jain further submitted that in any event as from a perusal of the impugned orders it would appear that individual oases have not been considered and only upon some allegations made by some persons, a purported inquiry was made by the District Education Establishment Committee, too same must be held to be vitiated in law. 7. Mr. Jagannath Jba, learned Government Pleader No.1 and Mr. P. M. Jha, learned Government Pleader No.4, on the other hand, submitted that as the orders of promotion passed in favour of the writ petitioners were woolly illegal and without jurisdiction, they have not derived any right to hold the said posts. It was further submitted that as from the counter-affidavit filed in C, W. J. C. No.4284 of 1901, it is evident that the matter has not been placed before the District Education Establishment Committee, the orders of promotion must be held to be wholly illegal. It was further pointed out that forgery has been committed in some cases, which would be evident from the fact that the letters communicating the orders of promotion to the petitioners do not find place in the issue register. 8. From a perusal of the impugned orders, it appears that a stereotype order has been passed by the District Superintendent of Education, purnea in all the cases on (sic) translated version where of is as follows : "on receipt of the allegation from different sources and in the light of the direction of Director, Primary Education, Bihar, Patna and according to the decision of the Education Establishment Committee in its meeting dated 7-9-1990, the promotion/direct appointment orders issued by the then District Superintendent of education, Purnea were verified from the office records, service book of teachers and records of the School and after detailad discussion in the meeting of the Establishment Committee held from 6-12-1990 to 8-12-1990, the promotion/direct appointment in higher scale order of Sri Md. Tarique Alaro, I. Sc. trained Assistant teacher, Middle School. Tarique Alaro, I. Sc. trained Assistant teacher, Middle School. Tappuhat (Dighal Bank) was found irregular for the following reasons: (a) His promotion was against the gradation list. (b) Promotion order was issued without obtaining the approval of the Establishment Committee. (c) Order was not counter-signed by the Deputy Development commissioner. (d) Promotion is not in proportion to the sanctioned post. Hence, the promotion/promotions of Sri Tarique Alam, Assistant teacher is cancelled with immediate effect. He will be in the present School waiting his posting and he will get the scale which be was getting prior to his promotion/direct appointment in higher scale. " 8. Before proceeding to consider the rival contentions of the parties, we must record that in similar situation this Court have in a number of cases quaihed such orders only on the ground of alleged violation of the principles of natural justice and directed the authorities to inquire into the matter afresh. However, in those oases various aspects of the matter have not been considered at all. 9. It is not disputed at the Bar that the State of Bihar has from time to time passed various resolutions laying down the conditions of service of the teachers as also the procedures for appointment, promotion etc. So far as teachers of Primary Schools are concerned, the oases of their appointments, promotions etc. are required to be placed before the District Education establishment Committee. It is also accepted at the bar that in terms of the policy decisions of the State of Bihar ; grant of a higher scale of pay depends upon the existence of vacancies and such vacancies have to be filled up upon taking into consideration the gradation list and/or suitability of the candidates to hold the post. 10. In view of the order proposed to be passed by us it is not necessary to consider the question as to whether the petitioners were entitled to be heard even in a case of this nature. In this case, as noticed hereinbefore, it is admitted that the matter was never placed before the District Education Establishment Committee and thus admittedly the orders of promotion grantedln favour of the petitioners illegal. 11. From a perusal of the impugned orders, it appears that an inquiry was conducted upon receipt of allegations made from different sources against the then District Superintendent of Education, Dr. 11. From a perusal of the impugned orders, it appears that an inquiry was conducted upon receipt of allegations made from different sources against the then District Superintendent of Education, Dr. Deo Chandra Jha, to the effect that he allegedly had issued orders of promotion without obtaining the recommendations of the District Education Establishment Committee nd without following procedures laid down therefor by the State. In some cases, it is alleged that the orders of promotion are forged and fabricated. 12. The issuance of writ of oertiorari is a discretionary remedy. The court may not issue a writ only because it is lawful to do so. The High Court in eieroise of its jurisdiction may refuse to exercise its jurisdiction in quashing the illegal order, if it is found that thereby another illegal order shall revive. In such an event, the Court may also quash both the orders. 13. In Pramod Kumar and others V/s. The State of Bihar and others, 1988 pljr 923, it has been held as follows :- "it is now well settled by the various decisions of this Court and the supreme Court of India that issuance of a writ of certiorari is a discretionary remedy. In this connection reference may be made in the case of Gode Venkateshwara Rao V/s. Government of Andhra pradesh and others, AIR 1966 SC 828 ; Abdul Majid and others v. The State Transport Appellate Authority, Bihar and others, AIR 1960 Patna 333 ; Dtvendra Praaad Gupta V/s. The State of Bihar and others, 1977 BBCJ 543 ; 1977 PLJR 576; Hari Pratad Mandal v. Additional Collector, 1978 BBCJ 575 ; 1978 PUR 630; banwari Lal Newatla V/s. Undtr Secretary to Government of India anothers, 1982 BLT 311 and 1988 (1) Supreme Court Cases page 40. The aforementioned decisions are authorities for the proposition that writ jurisdiction of and High Court only provides for discretionary remedy and it should not be exercised for quashing an order which might give rise to another illegal order as if substantial justice has been done to the parties. In this connection, reference may be made to recent decision of mine in the case of Jai Bharat Co. In this connection, reference may be made to recent decision of mine in the case of Jai Bharat Co. V/s. Central Coal Field Ltd. , reported in 1988 BLT (Rep) at page 192 wherein it was held that a High court would be justified in a given case to refuse to interfere with illegal order if it is inequitable so to do or if the same would be against public interest. " Reference in this connection may also be made to Suku Mahto and mother v the Stats of Bihar, 1992 (2) PLJR 134. 14 In S. L. Kapoor V/s. Jagmohan and others, ATR 1981 SC 136, it has been held that although non-observance of the principles of natural justice is itself prejudicial but in that case also it has been observed : "linked with this question is the question whether the failure to observe natural justice does at all matter if the observance of natural justice would have made no difference, the admitted or indisputable facts speaking for themselves. Where on the admitted or indisputable facts only one conclusion is possible and under the law only one penalty is permissible, the Court may not issue its writ to compel the observance of natural justice, not because it approved the non-observance of natural justice bat because courts do not issue futile writs. " 15. In this situation, we are of the view that it is not necessary for us to quash the impugned orders. 16. However, in the facts and circumstances of the case, we feel that as all the matters require fresh consideration at the hands of the Competent authority including the District Education Establishment Committee inasmuch as this court in various cases have directed the authorities to comply with the principles of natural justice, in our view, in this situation it would dot be proper for us to deny the benefit of the said decision to the petitioners. 17. In this view of the matter, we dispose of these writ applications upon giving following directions : (a) The District Education Officer, Purnea and the District Education establishment Committee shall classify the cases in batches In the following groups: (i) Where no recommendations/approval of the District Education establishment Committee was obtained. (ii) Where the cases of ths seniors have been left out. (iii) Wlwre the orders of promotion are forged ones. (b) Ms. (ii) Where the cases of ths seniors have been left out. (iii) Wlwre the orders of promotion are forged ones. (b) Ms. Jain, learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners as also the learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the State agreed that as the inquiry in the aforementioned matter is to be limited to the documents which are available in the office of the district Education Officer, it will not be necessary to give opportunity of hearing to each of the teachers individually. In this view of the matter, we direct that the District Education Establishment committee shall scrutinise all the records as also the orders of promotion passed in favour of concerned teachers in presence of the President and General Secretary of the Teachers Association. The affected teachers against whom the impugned orders have been passed and/or those who have been affected by reason of non-consideration of tbeir cases may file their respective representations together with all connected papers before the President and the General Secretary of their Association, who may verify the records in the light of the said documents. (c) In case it is found that either the orders of promotion were passed, without approval of the District Education Establishment Committee or ignoring the case of the senior teachers and/or said orders are forged documents, the impugned orders shall stand. (d) However, if in case of some teachers it is found that the orders of promotion were passed upon compliance with the Rules and/or articles 16 of the Constitution of India, the impugned orders as against them shall be recalled. (e) The requisite orders in these matters should be passed within two months from the date of receipt of the copy of this order. (f) However, in cases where it is found that in absence of proper gradation list it is not possible for the District Education Establishment committee and/or the representatives of the teachers to come to a just decision in that event a tentative gradation list would be prepared within three months from the date of receipt of the copy of this order and a final gradation list should be prepared within a period of two months thereafter and in the mean- while at least one months time should be given to the affected teachers to file their objections to the draft gradation list. Once the final gradation list is published, the District Education establishment Committee shall pass appropriate orders of promotion in accordance with law keeping in view the sanctioned strength of each cadre, the existing vacancy etc. 18. These applications are disposed of with the aforementioned directions. S. Hoda, J.-I agree. Writ applications disposed of with necessary directions.