Allowed

Shree Gangadhareshwara Educational Trust v. State of Karnataka

Karnataka HC22 Feb 2023WP/4140/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court disposed of a writ petition seeking quashing of notices regarding school recognition. The Court issued a mandamus to respondents to process the petitioner's online application for recognition within ten days, noting that the ex-parte injunction alleged as a bar had ceased to operate due to non-compliance, and without expressing an opinion on that underlying civil litigation.

What did the court decide?

Writ of mandamus issued to respondent No. 2 and 3 to consider the online application for school recognition and pass suitable orders within ten days.

Shree Gangadhareshwara Educational Trust Vs State… — Education and Admissions | Karnataka HC (2023)

¶1

¶2

WP No. 4140 of 2023

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶4

DATED THIS THE 22^ND DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2023

¶5

BEFORE

¶6

THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE PRADEEP SINGH YERUR

¶7

WRIT PETITION NO. 4140 OF 2023 (EDN-RES)

¶8

BETWEEN:

¶9

SHREE GANGADHARESHWARA EDUCATIONAL TRUST A TRUST REGISTERED UNDER THE PROVISIONS OF INDIAN TRUST ACT, 1882, HAVING REGISTERED OFFICER AT NO. 199, SHANTIDHAMA, SUNKADAKATTE, MAGADI MAIN ROAD, BENGALURU-560 091, REPRESENTED BY ITS TRUSTEE/PRESIDENT, GANGADHARAIAH. G AGE 76 YEARS

¶10

…PETITIONER

¶11

(BY SRI D.R.RAVISHANKAR, SERNIOR COUNSEL FOR SRI RAKESH B BHATT., ADVOCATE)

¶12

Digitally signed by VINUTHA M Location: High Court of Karnataka

¶13

AND:

¶14

STATE OF KARNATAKA DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION, VIKASA SOUDHA, BENGALURU-560 001. REPRESENTED BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY.

¶15

DEPUTY DIRECTOR (ADMINISTRATION) DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC INSTRUCTION, BANGALORE SOUTH DISTRICT, KALASIPALYAM, BENGALURU-560 002.

¶16

¶17

WP No. 4140 of 2023

¶18

BLOCK EDUCATION OFFICER DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC INSTRUCTION, BANGALORE SOUTH DIVISION-4, KRISHNARAJAPURA, BENGALURU-560 036.

¶19

…RESPONDENTS

¶20

(BY SMT PRAMODHINI KISHAN, AGA)

¶21

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE NOTICE BEARING NO. ANU4/KHA.SHA.DURU/25/2022-23 DATED 04/02/2022 ISSUED BY THE R-2- (ANNEXURE-P) AND ETC.

¶22

THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING, THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:

¶23

ORDER

¶24

Heard the learned Senior counsel Sri D.R.Ravishankar for the petitioner.

¶25

Learned Additional Government Advocate accepts notice for the respondents.

¶26

The petitioner is a trust registered under the Provisions of Indian Trust Act, 1882 with an object of providing education, social and philanthropic related services. In furtherance of the objectives of the trust, the petitioner has intended to start an educational institution in the name of ‘National Public School’ at Sarjapur. In pursuance of the same,

¶27

¶28

WP No. 4140 of 2023

¶29

the petitioner sought for registration of the educational institution with the respondents i.e., Department of Public Instructions and filed all necessary documents through online mode seeking approval to run the educational institution. Thereafter, the respondents-authorities after verifying the records and inspection of the property, registered the school and issued registered certificate on 18.06.2022.

¶30

Petitioner is presently running school with 1300 students with classes Nursery to 8^th standard. Initially, the time period required for applying for recognition was three months and thereafter, it was extended from time to time and finally till 31.12.2022. The mode of application was by online method. It is further stated that the property in which the petitioner started to run the school belongs to one Abhyudaya trust vide registered lease deed in favour of the petitioner dated 14.02.2022.

¶31

There was an inter se dispute between the owner of the premises and the petitioner due to which, the owner had got issued a legal notice dated 22.11.2022 for termination of the lease deed. In view of the difference between the petitioner and the owner of the land, the owner of the land invoked the

¶32

¶33

WP No. 4140 of 2023

¶34

Arbitration clause and filed an application in A.A.No.4/2003 before the City Civil Court, Bengaluru and sought for a prayer restraining the petitioner from admitting/enrolling any students

¶35

or receiving any amount towards fees. The arbitration application preferred by the owner of the land came to be heard and an ex-parte interim order was granted on 20.01.2023 restraining the petitioner from accepting deposit of fees from existing or newly enrolled students either in full or in part for the acadamic year 2023-24 at National Public School (NPS), Sarjapur Road, Bangalore. However, the said order was subject to compliance of mandatory provisions of Order 39 Rule 3 of CPC by the plaintiff/applicant therein i.e. the owner of the land.

¶36

It is submitted across the Bar by the learned Senior counsel for the petitioner that despite obtaining an order under Order 39 Rules 1 and 2 of CPC, the applicant therein i.e, the owner of the land had not complied with the Order 39 Rule 3 of CPC and the interim order was not extended by the Arbitration Court. Due to non-extension of the interim order, the applicant there i.e., the owner of the land filed an application to condone

¶37

¶38

WP No. 4140 of 2023

¶39

the delay in undertaking compliance under Order 39 Rule 3 of CPC which is pending adjudication before the Arbitration Court.

¶40

It is also brought to the notice of this Court that thereafter on two hearings i.e., 03.02.2023 and 06.02.2023, the matter came up before the Court and interim order of ex-parte injunction which was granted was not extended or continued in view of non-compliance of Order 39 Rule 3 by the applicant i.e., the owner of the land and it is also submitted that the said order of injunction which was initially granted is not in force as of now.

¶41

The dispute between the owner of the land and the petitioner is the reason causing hindrance to the recognition of the school and approval of the school to run the school which has ended up in a complaint being filed by one Krishanppa, President of M/s. Abhyudhaya Education Trust before the State authorities i.e, the respondents for non-providing the approval in view of the injunction granted by the Civil Court and based on the said injunction order, the respondents authorities have restrained themselves from processing the application fee.

¶42

¶43

WP No. 4140 of 2023

¶44

The learned Additional Government Advocate

¶45

contends that in view of the interim order granted by the Civil Court in A.A.No.4/2023, they are unable to process the application.

¶46

The submissions made by the learned Senior counsel and the documents placed before this Court including the orders dated 03.02.2023 (Annexure-N) and 06.02.2023 (Annexure-N1) passed by the City Civil Court, Bangalore with regard to the injunction order having not been continued clearly depict that there is no injunction order operating as on today. However, the application is nevertheless filed by the applicant therein i.e., the owner of the land seeking for extension of interim order which is yet to be decided.

¶47

Be that as it may, it is also submitted by the learned Senior counsel that there are certain other litigations between the owner of the land and the Bank for having taken the loan and not having paid, the petitioner's institution is paying the rental amount to the financial institution pursuant to the order of attachment passed by the Debt Recovery Tribunal arising out of O.A.No.138/2013 in R.C.No.11951/2017.

¶48

¶49

WP No. 4140 of 2023

¶50

The fact remains that the petitioner's institution has filed necessary application along with all documents and the same is pending consideration with the respondents for granting or rejection of the recognition to run the educational institution.

¶51

Annexures-P and Q are the internal communications between the Departments, learned Senior counsel, during the course of his arguments, contends that he would not press the two prayers for quashing of the notices at Annexures-P and Q. Learned Additional Government Advocate contends that these two are internal communication based on the interim order passed by the Civil Court in A.A.No.4/2023.

¶52

In view of the fact that the subsequent orders 03.02.2023 and 06.02.2023 passed by the City Civil Court, Bangalore clearly depict that the ex-parte interim order granted earlier is not extended due to non-compliance of Order 39 Rule 3, the only prayer that would survive for consideration before

¶53

this Court is with regard to the writ of mandamus for considering the application submitted by the petitioner with regard to grant of recognition to the petitioner's school. All the

¶54

¶55

WP No. 4140 of 2023

¶56

necessary documents and the papers having been submitted as required by way of online application, the same shall be considered and decided by the respondents within a reasonable time.

¶57

Accordingly, I pass the following:

¶58

ORDER

¶59

i) Writ petition is disposed of.

¶60

ii) A writ of mandamus is issued to respondent No.2 and 3 to consider the online application dated 25.11.2022 submitted by the petitioner vide Annexure-D in accordance to law and pass suitable orders within a period of ten days.

¶61

iii) However, it is made clear that this Court has not expressed any opinion with regard to the application filed for extension of interim order in A.A.No.4/2023 which is yet to be decided by the Civil Court on its own without being influenced by any observations/opinion of this Court.

¶62

Sd/JUDGE

¶63

List No.: 1 Sl No.: 3

¶64

Shree Gangadhareshwara Educational Trust v. State of Karnataka

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Shree Gangadhareshwara Educational Trust v. 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

Sowkhya College of Nursing Vs the Registrar

Mr. v K Ravindra @ R K Naidu @ Ravindra K Naidu Vs the Block Education Officer

Smt. Shubha. K. B. Vs Sri. Shishira Rao. H. a.

Akash Kumar K Vs the Bangalore University

Smt.M.L.Pruthvi Vs Raghu S P

Sri M Theja Vs Visvesvaraya Technological University