Intra-court appeal against single judge order in fee refund matter. Court set aside order holding that refund prayer was not adjudicated due to lack of respondent objection on that aspect; remanded for fresh hearing.
Set aside order dated 12.02.2020; single judge to adjudicate refund issue afresh after hearing.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
WA No. 353 of 2020
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 31ST DAY OF MAY, 2023
PRESENT
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE ALOK ARADHE
AND
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE ANANT RAMANATH HEGDE WRIT APPEAL NO. 353 OF 2020 (EDN-RES)
BETWEEN:
…APPELLANT
(BY SRI. S N BHAT, ADVOCATE)
AND:
Digitally signed by BELUR RANGADHAMA NANDINI Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
WA No. 353 of 2020
SULLIIA-574324, REP.BY ITS PRINCIPAL.
…RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI B RAJENDRA PRASAD, HCGP FOR R1, VISHNU AND NIHAL, ADVOCATE FOR SRI B.S. SACHIN, ADVOCATE FOR R2, SRI HARSHA G, ADVOCATE FOR SMT.R RADHA, ADVOCATE FOR R3)
THIS WRIT APPEAL IS FILED U/S 4 OF THE KARNATAKA HIGH COURT ACT PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE PORTION OF THE ORDER PASSED BY THE LEARNED SINGLE JUDGE IN WP NO.54625/2016 DATED 12/02/2020 PORTION OF THE ORDER RESERVING THE LIBERTY TO THE CONCERNED RESPONDENT TO PROCEED IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW IN RESPECT OF RECOVERY OF ANY FEES DUE FROM THE PETITIONER AND FURTHER DIRECT THE 3RD RESPONDENT INSTITUTION TO REFUND THE ENTIRE FEES PAID BY THE APPELLANT ON 26/09/2016.
THIS APPEAL COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING, THIS DAY ALOK ARADHE J., DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
JUDGMENT
Sri S N Bhat, learned counsel for the appellant. Sri B Rajendra Prasad, learned High Court Government Pleader for respondent No.1, Sri Vishnu and Sri Nihal for Sri B S Sachin, learned counsel for respondent No.2 and Sri Harsha G, learned counsel for Smt R Radha, learned counsel for respondent No.3.
dated 12.02.2020 passed by the learned Single Judge by which
WA No. 353 of 2020
the writ petition preferred by the appellant has been disposed of.
at length.
" Wherefore, it is prayed that this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to issue a writ of mandamus directing the 3rd respondent to return the all the certificate of the petitioner which was produced at the time of reporting on 26/09/2016 and also return the entire amount of fee collected by the 3rd respondent in respect of the BDS course for the academic year 2016-17 and grant such other relief that this Hon'ble Court deems fit to grant in the interest of justice and equity".
hearing, learned Single Judge without awaiting the return from the respondents, by an order dated 12.02.2020 has disposed of the writ petition. While disposing of the writ petition, learned
WA No. 353 of 2020
Single judge though has directed return of documents to the appellant, yet has not adverted to the prayer made by the appellant for refund. The endorsement of the appellant to refund of fee has not been adjudicated and the same cannot be adjudicated in this intra court appeal in the absence of any statement of objection on behalf of the contesting respondents.
Accordingly, the appeal is disposed of.
Sd/JUDGE
Sd/JUDGE
BRN List No.: 1 Sl No.: 27
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the order of the single judge directing return of documents but failing to adjudicate refund fees can be disposed of in intra-court appeal without respondents' objection.
Whether the single judge's order reserving liberty to recover fees and directing refund of fees required adjudication before appeal disposal.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Midhun Jose Chairamel
State of Karnataka
Rajiv Gandhi University of Health Science Karnataka
KVG Dental College and Hospital
Allok Aradhe
Anant Ramanath Hegde
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
