Allowed

Vishva Bharat Seva Samithi v. the Director

Karnataka HC23 Oct 2024WP/107004/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Karnataka allowed a writ petition filed by the Vishva Bharat Seva Samithi. The court issued a writ of mandamus directing the respondent state authorities to consider specific representations dated 28.07.2023 and 29.01.2018 regarding management disputes of the trust's educational institutions within eight weeks.

What did the court decide?

Issuance of writ of mandamus directing the respondents to consider the representation dated 28.07.2023 (Annexure-D) and 29.01.2018 (Annexure-D1) within eight weeks.

Vishva Bharat Seva Samithi Vs the Director — Education and Admissions | Karnataka HC (2024)

¶1

¶2

NC: 2024:KHC-D:15332 WP No. 107004 of 2023

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH DATED THIS THE 23^RD DAY OF OCTOBER, 2024

¶4

BEFORE

¶5

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRADEEP SINGH YERUR WRIT PETITION NO. 107004 OF 2023 (EDN-RES)

¶6

BETWEEN:

¶7

VISHVA BHARAT SEVA SAMITHI, NO.1644, ALLVAN GALLI, SHAHAPUR, BELAGAVI, REPRESENTED BY ITS PRESIDENT, SIR. VIJAY PARASHURAM NANDIHALLI, AGE: 65 YEARS, OCC: PRESIDENT OF VISHVA BHARAT SEVA SAMITHI, R/O. ALAVANGALLI, SHAHAPUR, TQ: AND DIST: BELAGAVI-590001.

¶8

…PETITIONER

¶9

(BY SRI. NANDISH PATIL, ADVOCATE)

¶10

AND:

¶11

THE DIRECTOR, PRE-UNIVERSITY EDUCATION BOARD, 18^TH CROSS, SAMPIGE ROAD, MALLESHWARAM, BANGALORE-560012.

¶12

MANJANNA E

¶13

Digitally signed by MANJANNA E Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA DHARWAD BENCH

¶14

THE JOINT DIRECTOR, PRE-UNIVERSITY EDUCATION BOARD, 18^TH CROSS, SAMPIGE ROAD, MALLESHWARAM, BANGALORE-560012.

¶15

THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF PRE-UNIVERSITY BOARD, BELAGAVI, TQ: AND DIST: BELAGAVI-590001.

¶16

…RESPONDENTS

¶17

(BY SRI. V.S. KALASURMATH, HCGP)

¶18

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO

¶19

A. ISSUE WRIT IN THE NATURE OF MANDAMUS DIRECTING THE RESPONDENT NOS.1 TO 3 TO CONSIDER THE REPRESENTATION DATED 28.07.2023 VIDE ANNEXURE-D, IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY AND ETC.

¶20

¶21

NC: 2024:KHC-D:15332 WP No. 107004 of 2023

¶22

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

¶23

ORAL ORDER

¶24

(PER: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRADEEP SINGH YERUR)

¶25

This petition is filed by the petitioner, seeking a

¶26

writ of mandamus for a direction to respondents No.1 to 3 to consider the representation dated 28.07.2023 and a representation dated 29.01.2018 vide Annexures-D and D1.

¶27

The petitioner is a Trust, registered under the Bombay Public Trust Act and it is running about 30 aided educational institutions in Belagavi and outside Belagavi district. A dispute arose between the President of the Trust

¶28

and other members with regard to management of the Trust and the matter went up till the Hon’ble Apex Court.

¶29

The Hon’ble Apex Court directed to hold elections to the bodies existing under the Trust under the supervision of Senior Civil Judge, Belagavi and accordingly elections were held. The petitioner herein was duly elected as the President of the Trust.

¶30

3 - NC: 2024:KHC-D:15332 WP No. 107004 of 2023

¶31

This being the state of affairs, the rival groups

¶32

without any authority of law, started interfering with the day to day activities of the educational institutions, leading to filing the cases in the Civil Courts in O.S. No.546 and 117 of 2013. An interim order came to be passed in the said suits.

¶33

Under these circumstances and the state of affairs of disagreement between the rival groups, that a rival group in collusion with the District Registrar, got a Society registered under the Societies Registration Act in the name of Vishva Bharat Seva Samithi. This further aggravated the issues pending before the Trust and the Society and the different groups involved, and petitions came to be filed before this Court, which were allowed and the respondents were directed to consider the representations made. Aggrieved by the orders passed by this Court, appeal also came to be filed and the same also

¶34

was disposed of, giving directions to the respondents to consider the representations and the proposal of the

¶35

4 - NC: 2024:KHC-D:15332 WP No. 107004 of 2023

¶36

petitioners in terms of the affidavit and pass suitable orders in accordance with law.

¶37

It is the contention of the learned counsel for the petitioners that, despite the representations given by the petitioners vide Annuxes-D & D1 hereinabove mentioned, no action has been taken by the respondents. Hence, the present petition is filed to consider the representations and pass suitable orders in accordance with law.

¶38

Per contra, learned High Court Government Pleader representing the respondents-State, contends that, time and again the petitioners being filing petitions, seeking for a writ of mandamus, which have already been considered and pursuant to which the contempt petition was also filed, in which the petitioners have admitted that the representation was considered. However, on perusal of the said submissions and the orders passed in the contempt proceedings, it is nowhere reflected that the respondents have considered the representations at

¶39

¶40

NC: 2024:KHC-D:15332 WP No. 107004 of 2023

¶41

Annexures- D & D1, which is filed along with the present petition. Under the circumstances, I pass the following:

¶42

ORDER

¶43

i. Petition is allowed.

¶44

ii. A writ of mandamus is issued directing the respondents No.1 to 3 to consider the representation dated 28.07.2023 at Annexure-D and the representation dated 29.01.2018 at Annexure-D1, if already not considered, in accordance with law, within a period of eight weeks from the date of receipt of copy of the order.

¶45

Sd/(PRADEEP SINGH YERUR) JUDGE

¶46

KGK CT-MCK List No.: 1 Sl No.: 17

Vishva Bharat Seva Samithi v. the Director

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Vishva Bharat Seva Samithi v. the Director

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

Smt Geeta D/O Melgirigouda Policepatil Vs the State of Karnataka

Kumari Rashi D/O Duradundeshwar Hiremath Vs the State of Karnataka

Dyamajji Rokkappa S/O D Bhimappa Vs State of Karnataka

Smt. Sunita W/O Santosh Suryawanshi Vs Shri. Aniruddha S/O Arun Kumbhar

Sri Lobzang Samastan S/O Tundup Goboo Vs the Assistant Commissioner

Siddeshwar S/O Kenchappa Koujalagi Vs the Deputy Commissioner