Disposed

Sri Vinayaka Education Society (Regd) v. the Government of Karnataka

Karnataka HC25 Jan 2021WA/187/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a writ appeal challenging a single judge order that dismissed a writ petition for lack of locus standi, the High Court of Karnataka agreed with the lower court, holding that the educational society was not the proper party to challenge orders passed against its individual employees.

What did the court decide?

The writ appeal was disposed of in favor of the respondents. Liberty was reserved to the individual employees to assail the original orders if aggrieved.

Sri Vinayaka Education Society… — Constitutional and Fundamental Rights | Karnataka HC (2021)

¶1

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, BENGALURU

¶3

DATED THIS THE 25^TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2021

¶4

PRESENT

¶5

THE HON’BLE MRS. JUSTICE B.V.NAGARATHNA

¶6

AND

¶7

THE HON’BLE MRS. JUSTICE M.G. UMA

¶8

WRIT APPEAL No.187/2020 (EDN-RES)

¶9

BETWEEN:

¶10

SRI VINAYAKA EDUCATION SOCIETY (REGD.) REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, M. SHIVALINGAPPA S/O. MALIYAPPA, AGED ABOUT 62 YEARS, RESIDENT OF SIDDARAMANAGARA, HOSADURGA TOWN, CHITRADURGA DISTRICT - 577 527. ... APPELLANT

¶11

(BY SRI GANGADHARAPPA A.V., ADVOCATE)

¶12

AND:

¶13

THE GOVERNMENT OF KARNATAKA, REPRESENTED BY ITS

¶14

SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT,

¶15

EDUCATION DEPARTMENT (SECONDARY EDUCATION) MULTISTORIED BUILDING, BENGALURU - 560 001.

¶16

THE COMMISSIONER, DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC INSTRUCTIONS, NEW PUBLIC OFFICE BUILDING, K.R. CIRCLE, NRUPATHUNGA ROAD,

¶17

BENGALURU - 560 001. ... RESPONDENTS

¶18

(BY SRI C.N. MAHADESHWARAN, ADDITIONAL GOVERNMENT ADVOCATE FOR R-1 AND R-2)

¶19

THIS WRIT APPEAL IS FILED UNDER SECTION 4 OF THE KARNATAKA HIGH COURT ACT PRAYING TO ALLOW THIS APPEAL, SET ASIDE THE ORDER DATED 27/01/2020 PASSED IN W.P.NO.7444/2016 AND BE PLEASED TO ALLOW THE WRIT PETITION AS PRAYED FOR WITH COSTS THROUGHOUT.

¶20

¶21

THIS APPEAL COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING THIS DAY, NAGARATHNA J., DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:-

¶22

J U D G M E N T

¶23

The appellant is an education society represented by its Secretary who has assailed order dated 27/01/2020, passed in W.P.No.7444/2016. By the said order, learned single Judge has dismissed the writ petition on the ground of locus standi by holding that the appellant/writ petitioner had no locus standi to file the writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India so as to assail the orders dated 19/01/2016, passed by respondent No.1 (Annexure - K) and consequential memorandum dated 25/01/2016 issued by respondent No.2 (Annexure - M) concerning the alleged misconduct of Sri M.Shivalingappa, Head Master; Smt. R.S.Renuka, Assistant Teacher (Hindi) in Sri Vinayaka Composite Junior College (High School Section), Malali, Hosadurga Taluk, Chitradurga District in connection with a Lokayuktha trap case.

¶24

We have heard learned counsel for the appellant and learned Additional Government Advocate for respondent Nos.1 and 2, who has appeared on advance notice and perused the material on record.

¶25

¶26

Admittedly, Annexures "K" and "M" have been

¶27

issued as against the aforesaid two persons namely Sri M. Shivalingappa and Smt. R.S.Renuka. If at all they were aggrieved by the said orders, it was they, who had locus standi to assail the same in accordance with law. The petitioner herein is an educational society.

¶28

Learned counsel for the appellant/writ petitioner submitted that since the two persons against whom the impugned orders were passed are the employees of the appellant/society and they had acted in accordance with the directions issued by the appellant/society, the writ petitions were filed assailing the orders issued against the aforesaid two persons by the petitioner/society. He contended that the learned single Judge was not right in dismissing the writ petition on the ground of locus standi.

¶29

Per contra, learned Additional Government Advocate who appeared on advance notice contended that the impugned order would not call for any interference in this appeal.

¶30

¶31

We are in agreement with the order of the

¶32

learned single Judge.

¶33

In the circumstances, we dispose of this appeal by reserving liberty to Sri M.Shivalingappa and Smt. R.S. Renuka to assail the orders Annexures - "K" and "M" if

¶34

they are so aggrieved and are so advised.

¶35

It is needless to observe that if any such challenge is made to the said orders at Annexures - "K" and "M", the dismissal of the writ petition filed by appellant herein would not come in the way of such a challenge.

¶36

Appeal is disposed of in the aforesaid terms.

¶37

Consequently, I.A.No.1/2020 also stands disposed.

¶38

Sd/JUDGE

¶39

Sd/JUDGE

¶40

Sri Vinayaka Education Society (Regd) v. the Government of Karnataka

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sri Vinayaka Education Society (Regd) v. the Government of Karnataka

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Dr Ca a S Vishnu Bharath Vs State of Karnataka

Samarpana (Cultural and Social Service Organisation) Vs the Chief Secretary

Sri Mallikarjuna M M Vs Smt Nagashree

Sri. Manoj Naik Vs Manohar Nagappa Naik

M/S Thematics Infotech Pvt. Ltd., Vs the Commissioner

Sri S Raghunathan Vs Union of India