A writ appeal challenging the Single Judge's order upholding a Termination Tribunal order reinstating a teacher with backwages was dismissed. The Court held that AICTE-affiliated institutions are subject to the Educational Appellate Tribunal for service disputes.
The writ appeal filed under Article 227 of the Constitution was dismissed as lacking merit.
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.
NC: 2025:KHC:36979-DB WA No. 1509 of 2023
HC-KAR
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 12TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2025
PRESENT
THE HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE ANU SIVARAMAN
AND
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH RAI K
WRIT APPEAL NO. 1509 OF 2023 (S-RES)
BETWEEN:
SRI GURUMALLESHWARA MAHAVIDYA SAMSTHE (REGD) DEVANUR GRAMA, NANJANGUD TALUK MYSURU DISTRICT-571 119.
Digitally signed by PANKAJA S Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
SRI GURUMALLESHWARA MAHAVIDYA SAMSTHE (REGD) DEVANUR GRAMA, NANJANGUD TALUK MYSURU DISTRICT-571 119.
SRI GURUMALLESHWARA POLYTECHNIC DEVANUR, NANJANGUD TALUK MYSURU DISTRICT-571 119
…APPELLANTS
(BY SRI. ANIL KUMAR S, ADVOCATE)
AND:
GURUSHANTHAMURTHY S S/O SUBBAPPA
NC: 2025:KHC:36979-DB WA No. 1509 of 2023
HC-KAR
AGED ABOUT 54 YEARS R/AT KUNTHUR, KOLLEGAL TALUK CHAMARAJANAGARA DISTRICT
…RESPONDENT
(BY SRI. RAMESH H.E, ADVOCATE FOR C/R1)
THIS WRIT APPEAL IS FILED U/S 4 OF THE KARNATAKA HIGH COURT ACT PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE JUDGEMENT PASSED IN WP NO.18752/2011 DATED 05/10/2023, AND THEREBY ALLOW THE WRIT APPEAL AS PRAYED FOR, AND AWARD COSTS AND GRANT SUCH OTHER RELIEF/S.
THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER:
CORAM: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE ANU SIVARAMAN and
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH RAI K
ORAL JUDGMENT
(PER: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH RAI K)
This intra Court appeal is filed by the appellants challenging the order dated 05.10.2023 passed by the learned Single Judge in W.P.No.18752/2011 disposing of the writ petition.
HC-KAR
for reinstatement with continuity of service and with backwages and also directed the appellants to pay Rs.43,945/to the respondent. Against which, the appellants preferred W.P.No.18752/2011, wherein the learned Single Judge has confirmed the reinstatement of the respondent with 10% backwages by construing the salary of the respondent as Rs.7,050/-.
Kumar S. for the appellants and learned counsel Sri Ramesha H.E., for the respondent.
that the respondent has misappropriated the funds of the appellant-institution and also the funds belonging to the hostel run by the institution while working as a Manager of the said institution. As such, after an enquiry, the respondent's services were terminated. The appellantinstitution, being a polytechnic and ITI, is governed by the provisions of the All India Council for Technical Education Act, 1987 (for brevity, "the 1987 Act") and as such,
HC-KAR
provisions of Karnataka Education Act, 1983 (for brevity, "the 1983 Act") are not applicable and the very order passed by the Tribunal is without jurisdiction. Further, for the misappropriation of the funds of the institution, the institution has rightly terminated the respondent from service.
HC-KAR
per law. Further, the respondent's services were terminated by the appellant-institution without providing him any opportunity to defend himself, in gross violation of principles of natural justice. In such circumstances, the Tribunal and the learned Single Judge have rightly set
aside the order of termination and reinstated the respondent with backwages as aforesaid. Hence, there is no perversity or illegality in the impugned order passed by the learned Single Judge. Accordingly, he prays to dismiss the appeal.
also the order of the learned Single Judge and also the records.
institution that the institution, being polytechnic and ITI, is governed by the provisions of the 1987 Act and as such,
the provisions of the 1983 Act are not applicable is concerned, a Co-ordinate Bench of this Court in D. JEEVAGAN V. THE PRINCIPAL, MEI POLYTECHNIC AND
HC-KAR
OTHERS - ILR 2007 KAR 4870 has held that since the All India Council for Technical Education Regulations do not provide for any statutory regulations to resolve disputes of the employees, such aggrieved employees of an institution affiliated to the AICTE would have a right to approach the Educational Appellate Tribunal.
NC: 2025:KHC:36979-DB WA No. 1509 of 2023
HC-KAR
SD/(ANU SIVARAMAN) JUDGE
SD/(RAJESH RAI K) JUDGE
PKS
List No.: 1 Sl No.: 27
3 issues framed by the court
Whether the writ appeal challenging the Single Judge's order upholding the Educational Appellate Tribunal's decision to reinstate a terminiated teacher can be allowed.
Whether the provisions of the 1983 Karnataka Education Act are applicable to determine employee disputes in AICTE affiliated polytechnics and ITIs.
Whether the impugned order reinstating a respondent with backwages, despite the appellant's claim of misappropriation, is liable to be set aside.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
D. JEEVAGAN V. THE PRINCIPAL, MEI POLYTECHNIC AND OTHERSReferred¶59
D. JEEVAGAN V. THE PRINCIPAL, MEI POLYTECHNIC AND OTHERS - ILR 2007 KAR 4870 · Who else cites this
1 provisions across 1 enactments
SRI GURUMALLESHWARA MAHAVIDYA SAMSTHE (REGD)
GURUSHANTHAMURTHY S
ANU SIVARAMAN
RAJESH RAI K
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
