Allowed

Smt. Manjula Mallesh College of Education (Bed) v. the State of Karnataka

Karnataka HC1 Apr 2014WP/8575/2014

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court allowed the writ petitions seeking quashing of the resolution withdrawing the petitioner's institution affiliation. The court ruled that since a prior order in W.P.51844-45/2013 declared the underlying Task Force Committee report invalid and non-actionable, the present petitions must be allowed based on that legal position.

What did the court decide?

Petitions allowed in terms of the order in W.P.51844-45/2013 dated 10.12.2013. Petitioner directed to make an application for local inspection committee for academic year 2013-14.

Smt. Manjula Mallesh College of Education (Bed)… — Writ and Judicial Review | Karnataka HC (2014)

¶1

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE

¶3

DATED THIS THE 1^ST DAY OF APRIL, 2014

¶4

BEFORE

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANAND BYRAREDDY

¶6

WRIT PETITION Nos. 8575-76 OF 2014 (EDN-RES)

¶7

BETWEEN:

¶8

Smt. Manjula Mallesh College of Education (BEd) Canara Bank Colony Nagarabavi Road Bangalore-72 Rep by its Secretary

¶9

…PETITIONER

¶10

(By Shri.D.R. Ravishankar , Advocate)

¶11

AND:

¶12

The State of Karnataka, Represented by its Secretary to the Department of Higher Education.

¶13

Bangalore University, Gnanabharathi Campus, Bangalore. Represented by its Registrar.

¶14

Vice Chancellor, Bangalore University, Bangalore.

¶15

¶16

Registrar(Evaluation) Bangalore University, Bangalore.

¶17

… RESPONDENTS

¶18

(By Smt. Prathima Honnapur Advocate for R1, Sri. N.K. Ramesh, Advocate for R2-4)

¶19

¶20

These Writ Petitions are filed under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India praying to Quash Resolution of the Syndicate of the R-2 Dated 17.5.2013 in its special meeting and also orders passed by the R-1 Dated 30.8.2-13 vide Ann-J & K respectively and etc.

¶21

These Writ Petitions coming on for Preliminary Hearing in “B” Group on this day, the court made the following:

¶22

O R D E R

¶23

The primary grievance of the petitioner in this case is

¶24

that the affiliation granted to the petitioner – Institution has been withdrawn on the basis of a Task Force Committee report and the learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the validity or otherwise of the Task Force Committee report has been questioned in other petitions before this Court in W.P.No.51844-45/2013 by other institutions, which have been allowed by order dated 10.12.2013 and it has been held that the

¶25

¶26

report filed by the Task Force Committee are invalid and cannot be acted upon. Therefore, the present affiliation having been withdrawn on account of such a Task Force Committee report, the present petitions would also have to be allowed.

¶27

The learned counsel appearing for the University does

¶28

not dispute this legal position. Therefore, the present petitions are allowed in terms of the order in W.P.51844-45/2013 dated 10.12.2013.

¶29

Incidentally, insofar as the affiliation for the academic year 2013-14 is concerned, the petitioner is to make an application against which the respondents will appoint the Local Inspection Committee, which is the process in considering the renewal of affiliation of the petitioner – Institution for the academic year 2013-14.

¶30

Sd/JUDGE

¶31

Smt. Manjula Mallesh College of Education (Bed) v. the State of Karnataka

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Smt. Manjula Mallesh College of Education (Bed) v. the State of Karnataka

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

H N Sadashiva Vs State of Karnataka

Ramakrishna Vs State of Karnataka

Smt. R K Krishnamma Vs State of Karnataka

Kumari Punitha L Vs the Karnataka State Diploma in

Manohara B M Vs Vidyodaya Law College

S Ganapathi Vs the Official Liquidator the Mysore Kirlsokar Ltd.