Judgment :- Common Order 1. These writ petitions are filed to issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus calling for the records of the 5th respondent in relation to the order issued in No.677/10, dated 5.5.2010 and quash the same and issue a consequential direction to the respondents to allow the petitioners to continue as Secondary Grade Teacher in the 5th respondent school with service and monetary benefits. 2. The petitioners are secondary grade teachers joined the services of the fifth respondent based on a teacher training Institute Certificate. The petitioner in WP No.10995/ 2010 joined the services on 14.10.1996, petitioner in WP No.10996 of 2010 joined the services on 6.1.1993; petitioner in WP No. 10997 of 2010 joined the services on 15.7.2002 and petitioner in WP No.10998 of 2010 joined the services on 06.1.1993. On 5.5.2010 on a complaint by a third party by referring to an order of the High Court dated 27.5.1993, which is in relation to de-recognition of Teachers Training Institution, the impugned order of dismissal came to be passed. The petitioner in all the writ petition inter alia contends that there is a gross violation of Principles of Natural justice and the impugned order is arbitrary and capricious inasmuch as the notice is issued giving the petitioners an opportunity of defending the claim after the order of dismissal is passed. On this plea, the petitioner in these writ petitions are justified in approaching this Court as the fifth respondent has proceeded to pass the order of dismissal without putting the petitioner on notice, the grounds on which, they are being dismissed from service when the petitioners have already served for more than 15 years. 3. The petitioner has specifically taken a plea in the ground 'B' that the impugned order of termination has been passed without giving any notice and opportunity to the petitioner and that has not been refuted by the respondents in the counter. On the contrary, paragraph 9 of the counter affidavit clearly endorses the adage that the cart has been set before the horse. Paragraph 9 of the counter reads as follows:- "I respectfully submit that though the order of dismissal was passed on 5.5.2010 without notice to the petitioners an opportunity was given to each of them to produce any document which is in his/her possession to prove that he/she is eligible and legally entitled to continue in the employment. Paragraph 9 of the counter reads as follows:- "I respectfully submit that though the order of dismissal was passed on 5.5.2010 without notice to the petitioners an opportunity was given to each of them to produce any document which is in his/her possession to prove that he/she is eligible and legally entitled to continue in the employment. Despite giving such opportunity, the petitioners have not produced any document to substantiate their contention that they are eligible to continue in service with the 5th respondent but has rushed to this Hon'ble Court to obtain an order of stay." 4. Further, the statement in the order that each of the petitioner is entitled to give proper material or Court order in support of the claim for continuation of service after passing the termination order, is nothing but arbitrary. The fifth respondent is not entitled to pass an order of dismissal and thereafter give the petitioner in all these petitions an opportunity of defending the case. This is a gross injustice and accordingly, the impugned order is set aside. The fifth respondent is at liberty to issue a proper notice and the petitioner in these petitions is entitled to give individual reply raising all legal issues as has been urged before this Court. 5. These writ petitions are allowed as indicated above. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petitions are closed. No costs.