Allowed

Mahatma Gandhi Vidya Peeta v. the Secretary

Karnataka HC17 Aug 2022WP/11677/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court allowed a writ petition challenging unreasoned orders refusing permission to commence higher primary classes. The court quashed the impugned orders for violating natural justice and remitted the matter for fresh reconsideration.

What did the court decide?

Impugned orders dated 24.09.2020 and 03.03.2022 quashed and matter remitted to Respondent No. 3 for reconsideration.

Mahatma Gandhi Vidya Peeta Vs the Secretary — Education and Admissions | Karnataka HC (2022)

¶1

¹

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 17^TH DAY OF AUGUST, 2022

¶3

BEFORE

¶4

THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE S.R.KRISHNA KUMAR WRIT PETITION No.11677 OF 2022 (EDN-RES)

¶5

BETWEEN:

¶6

MAHATMA GANDHI VIDYA PEETA IS A SOCIETY REGISTERED

¶7

UNDER KARNATAKA SOCIETIES REGISTRATION ACT, 1960 ANAVATTI, SORABA TALUK SHIVAMOGGA DISTRICT.

¶8

REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY SRI ARUN WODEYAR S/O SRI CHAMARAJ WODEYAR AGED ABOUT 60 YEARS R/O DODDIKOPPA,MOODI POST SORABA TALUK, SHIVAMOGGA-577 429.

¶9

…PETITIONER

¶10

(BY SRI. HIREMATH MALLAYYA VEERAYYA., ADVOCATE)

¶11

AND:

¶12

1 . THE SECRETARY DEPARTMENT OF PRIMARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION., GOVERNMENT OF KARNATAKA M S BUILDING, BENGALURU-560001.

¶13

2 . THE COMMISSIONER DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC INSTRUCTIONS GOVERNMENT OF KARNATAKA NRUPATHUNGA ROAD BENGALURU-560 001.

¶14

3 . THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC INSTRUCTIONS SHIVAMOGGA-577201.

¶15

4 . THE BLOCK EDUCATION OFFICER SORABA TALUK SHIVAMOGGA-577429

¶16

²

¶17

5 . THE DIRECTOR (PRIMARY EDUCATION) O/O THE DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC INSTRUCTIONS GOVERNMENT OF KARNATAKA NRUPATHUNGA ROAD BENGALURU-560 001.

¶18

…RESPONDENTS

¶19

(BY SMT. SHARADAMBA., AGA)

¶20

THIS W.P. IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE IMPUGNED OM DATED 24.09.2020 PASSED BY THE R3, IN NO.J2 HOSHANO/75/2020.21 AS PER ANNEXURE-H AND CONSEQUENTLY ORDER DATED 03.03.2022 ISSUED BY THE R5 IN APPEAL NO.01.2021 AS PER ANNEXURE-P BY ISSUE OF WRIT OF NATURE OF CERTIORARI OR ANY OTHER WRIT OR DIRECTION AS THE CASE MAY BE.

¶21

THIS W.P. COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING IN ‘B’ GROUP THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:-

¶22

ORDER

¶23

In this petition, petitioner has sought for the following

¶24

reliefs:-

¶25

“(a) To quash the impugned OM dated: 24.09.2020 passed by Respondent No.3 in No. J2 Hoshano/75/2020-21 as per Annexure-H and consequently order dated: 03.03.2022 issued by Respondent No.5 in Appeal No.01/2021 as per Annexure-P by issue of writ in the nature of certiorari or any other writ or direction as the case may be;

¶26

(b) To grant permission to commence Nrupatunga English Medium Higher Primary School from VI to VIII Std., commencing from the academic year 2020-2021 as per the proposal dated: 29.01.2020 submitted by the Petitioner Management;

¶27

³

¶28

(c) To grant such other relief/s as deems fit in the circumstances of the case and allow the writ petition with costs in the interest of justice and equity.”

¶29

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned AGA for the respondents and perused the material on record.

¶30

The material on record discloses that though several contentions have been urged by both sides in support of their respective claims, a perusal of the impugned order (OM) dated 24.09.2020 passed by respondent No.3 vide Annexure-H as well as the impugned order dated 03.03.2022 vide Annexure-P passed by respondent No.5-Appellate Authority in Appeal No.1/2021 preferred by the petitioner are unreasoned and nonspeaking orders, which have been passed application of mind and also without considering the material on record including the documents, photographs etc., produced by he petitioner and as such, the impugned orders being violative

¶31

of principles of natural justice, without expressing any opinion on the merits/demerits of the rival contentions, I

¶32

⁴

¶33

deem it just and proper to quash the impugned orders and remit the matter back to respondent No.3 for reconsideration afresh in accordance with law.

¶34

4. In the result, I pass the following:-

¶35

ORDER

¶36

(i) Petition is hereby allowed.

¶37

(ii) The impugned Official Memorandum dated 24.09.2020 issued by the 3^rd respondent at Annexure-H as well as the impugned order at Annexure-P passed by respondent No.5 in Appeal No.1/2021 dated 03.03.2022 are hereby quashed.

¶38

(iii) The matter is remitted back to the 3^rd respondent for reconsideration afresh in accordance with law.

¶39

(iv) Liberty is reserved in favour of the petitioner to file additional pleadings and produce additional documents, which shall be considered by the 3^rd respondent in accordance with law, within a period of two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

¶40

Srl./Bmc

Mahatma Gandhi Vidya Peeta v. the Secretary

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mahatma Gandhi Vidya Peeta v. the Secretary

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

Kirloskar Electric Company Employees' Vs the State of Karnataka

Mr N Irfath Ahmed Vs Inspector of Central Tax (Preventive)

The General Insurance Employees Vs the Registar of

The Official Liquidator Vs Smt Prema Ratnakar

Sri. M. Shashidhara Vs the Assistant Registrar of Co. Operative Societies

Shashidhar Vs the State of Karnataka