ORDER : This petition is filed by the petitioner challenging the Order dated 25.4.2016 vide Annexure-E and the memo dated 25.4.2016 vide Annexure-F issued by the respondent No.5 and the order dated 11.4.2016 vide Annexure-H issued by the respondent No.4. 2. The petitioner being the Management which is running a private unaided educational institution is aggrieved by the order passed by the respondents 5 and 4 at Annexures-E, F & H directing closure of the educational institution run by the petitioner and the order of withdrawal of recognition at Annexure-H. The petitioner had filed the petition challenging Annexures-E & F issued by the respondent No.5 mainly on the ground that the respondent No.5 had no jurisdiction to issue any direction for withdrawal of the recognition of the Institution as per the provisions of the Karnataka Education Act, 1983 [‘Act’, for short]. It was the case of the petitioner that without resorting to withdrawal of the recognition, closure of the institution cannot be directed by the respondent No.5. 3. It is submitted by the Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner that the order at Annexure-H dated 11.4.2016 was passed by the authorities subsequent to filing of the writ petition, in order to overcome the challenge made by the petitioner in the writ petition; it is ante dated and the said order was not communicated to the petitioner, as such the petitioner was oblivious of passing of the said order. This order dated 11.4.2016 refers to the letter of the respondent No.5 dated 25.4.2016. Hence, the writ petition got amended to challenge the order at Annexure-H. 4. It is manifestly clear that the letter dated 25.4.2016 at Annexure-F was addressed by the respondent No.5 directing the respondent No.4 to withdraw the recognition of the institution. Surprisingly, the respondent No.4 referring to the said letter dated 25.4.2016 has passed the order withdrawing the recognition of the institution on 11.4.2016. The inconsistency apparent on the face of the record establishes the manipulations made by the respondent No.4 in passing the order withdrawing the recognition of the institution. Section 39 of the Act contemplates that the withdrawal of the recognition can be made by the competent authority for the reasons recorded in writing after giving to the local authority as the case may be the Governing Council an opportunity of making its representation against such withdrawal or action. Section 39 of the Act contemplates that the withdrawal of the recognition can be made by the competent authority for the reasons recorded in writing after giving to the local authority as the case may be the Governing Council an opportunity of making its representation against such withdrawal or action. It transpires that no such opportunity was provided prior to passing of the order at Annexure-H which is perverse and in violation of the principles of natural justice. Accordingly, the order passed by the respondent No.4 at Annexure-H requires to be set aside. Annexures-E, F & H, the orders passed by the Authorities being contrary to section 39 of the Act and against the principles of natural justice, are quashed. Writ petition is allowed with liberty to the respondents to proceed in accordance with law after providing an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner.