JUDGMENT ( 1 ) CALLED out from the final hearing board. ( 2 ) THE petitioner has challenged the impugned order dated 5. 3. 2002, whereby the Presiding Officer, School Tribunal, Pune region, Pune has set aside the termination order dated 23/27. 3. 2001 and directed the petitioner to reinstate the respondent No. l. This Court while admitting the petition after hearing both parties, granted an interim relief in terms of prayer clause (c) and thereby stayed the impugned order. It is also observed, "in the event, petitioner opens or start any school, it will be open to the Respondent to apply for further directions". ( 3 ) A statement is made that there was no such application made by respondent No. 1 because the School itself was closed down. It was unauthorized and illegal according to respondent No. 5 education officer also. The termination letter dated 23. 3. 2001 itself makes position very clear that the management has decided to close down the said English Primary School and therefore, the services are not required and accordingly terminated and as it was temporary. Therefore, the order of termination in this background cannot be said to be bad or illegal. The aspect of jurisdiction of school Tribunal with regard to the dispute of employees of any unrecognized school is very essential to be decided before passing any order under section 9 of the Maharashtra Employees of Private schools (Conditions of Service) Regulation Act, l977 (for short called as "meps Act" ). ( 4 ) THERE is no reasoning given whatsoever with regard to the said aspect in the order. Unless the school is recognized, the tribunal has no jurisdiction, basically when the position was made very clear in the termination order as well as before Tribunal by raising specific plea of jurisdiction. The Division Bench of this court, in Anna Manikrao Pethe -vs- Presiding Officer, School tribunal, Amravati and Aurangabad Division , Amravati and ors (1997 (3) Mah L. J. 697), has observed that it will be necessary for the Tribunal to frame and decide the preliminary issue covering the aspect of recognition of the school as defined under the MEPS Act. If the school itself as observed and as recorded above is unauthorized and illegal, there is no question of passing any order of reinstatement. If the school itself as observed and as recorded above is unauthorized and illegal, there is no question of passing any order of reinstatement. While granting interim relief as recorded above, the Court has taken note of this aspect and even permitted the respondent to apply in case the petitioner starts new english School. It is clear even according to respondent No. 5 education Officer to be illegal and unauthorized. Now said school is already closed, there is no question of granting any order of reinstatement as done in the present case. ( 5 ) IN the present facts and circumstances, therefore, considering above, the impugned order need to be set aside. In the result the order dated 05. 03. 2002, passed by Presiding Officer, school Tribunal, Pune Region, Pune is set aside. The Petition is allowed in terms of prayer clause (b ). No order as to costs.