There are $2006$ students and $14$ teachers in a school. Each student knows at least one teacher (knowing is a symmetric relation). Suppose that, for each pair of a student and a teacher who know each other, the ratio of the number of the students whom the teacher knows to that of the teachers whom the student knows is at least $t.$ Find the maximum possible value of $t.$
1. **Define Variables and Setup:**
   Let \( a_i \) for \( i = 1, 2, \ldots, 14 \) denote the number of students known to teacher \( i \). Similarly, let \( b_j \) for \( j = 1, 2, \ldots, 2006 \) denote the number of teachers known by student \( j \). We can represent this situation as a bipartite graph where one set consists of teachers and the other set consists of students. An edge \((i, j)\) exists if teacher \( i \) knows student \( j \).

2. **Initial Observations:**
   For each pair \((i, j)\) where teacher \( i \) knows student \( j \), the ratio of the number of students known by teacher \( i \) to the number of teachers known by student \( j \) is at least \( t \). Mathematically, this is expressed as:
   \[
   \frac{a_i}{b_j} \geq t
   \]

3. **Upper Bound for \( t \):**
   Consider the case where each teacher knows all 2006 students and each student knows all 14 teachers. In this scenario:
   \[
   a_i = 2006 \quad \text{and} \quad b_j = 14
   \]
   The ratio \( t \) in this case is:
   \[
   t = \frac{2006}{14} = 143
   \]
   Therefore, the maximum possible value of \( t \) cannot exceed 143.

4. **Proof by Contradiction:**
   Assume that for every pair \((i, j)\) where teacher \( i \) knows student \( j \), the ratio \( \frac{a_i}{b_j} < 143 \). This implies:
   \[
   \frac{1}{b_j} < \frac{143}{a_i}
   \]
   Summing over all students \( j \) known by teacher \( i \):
   \[
   \sum_{j: (i,j) \in E} \frac{1}{b_j} < 143 \sum_{j: (i,j) \in E} \frac{1}{a_i} = 143 \cdot 1 = 143
   \]

5. **Summing Over All Teachers:**
   Summing the above inequality over all teachers \( i \):
   \[
   \sum_{i=1}^{14} \sum_{j: (i,j) \in E} \frac{1}{b_j} < 14 \cdot 143 = 2002
   \]

6. **Rearranging the Summation:**
   Swap the order of summation:
   \[
   \sum_{j=1}^{2006} \sum_{i: (i,j) \in E} \frac{1}{b_j} = \sum_{j=1}^{2006} \frac{1}{b_j} \sum_{i: (i,j) \in E} 1 = \sum_{j=1}^{2006} \frac{1}{b_j} b_j = 2006
   \]
   This gives:
   \[
   2006 < 2006
   \]
   which is a contradiction.

7. **Conclusion:**
   Since our assumption led to a contradiction, there must exist at least one pair \((i, j)\) such that:
   \[
   \frac{a_i}{b_j} \geq 143
   \]
   Therefore, the maximum possible value of \( t \) is indeed 143.

The final answer is \(\boxed{143}\).