Abdul Rehaman K S/O Abdul Rawoof K Vs the Head of… — Writ and Judicial Review | Karnataka HC (2025)

Abdul Rehaman K S/O Abdul Rawoof K Vs the Head of… — Writ and Judicial Review | Karnataka HC (2025)

1 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:4145 WP No. 101079 of 2025

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA,

DHARWAD BENCH

DATED THIS THE 3^RD DAY OF MARCH, 2025

BEFORE

THE HON'BLE MRS JUSTICE M.G.UMA WRIT PETITION NO. 101079 OF 2025 (EDN-RES)

BETWEEN:

ABDUL REHAMAN K S/O. ABDUL RAWOOF K. AGE. 39 YEARS, OCC. PVT. JOB R/O. WARD NO.2, BEHIND HIGH SCHOOL HOSA DAROJI, TQ. SANDUR, DIST. BALLARI - 583129.

…PETITIONER

(BY SRI. RAGHAVENDRA A. PUROHIT, ADVOCATE)

AND:

MALLIKARJUN RUDRAYYA KALMATH

HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH, DHARWAD

THE HEAD OF THE BOARD KARNATAKA NURSING AND PARA MEDICAL BOARD, REGULATING AUTHORITY, 1^ST FLOOR, LIBRARY BLOCK BANGALORE MEDICAL COLLEGE, AND RESEARCH INSTIUTE K. R. ROAD, BENGALURU-560002.

THE MEDICAL OFFICER AYUSH GOVERNMENT AYURVEDA HOSPITAL, HOSA DAROJI, TQ. SANDUR, DIST. BALLARI- 583129.

THE PRINCIPAL KLS SCHOOL OF NURSING, NO.16/6, ISR ROAD, HOSPETE, DIST. VIJAYANAGAR-583201.

2 -

NC: 2025:KHC-D:4145 WP No. 101079 of 2025

THE HEAD OF THE BOARD KARNATAKA STATE DIPLOMA IN NURSING EXAMINATION BOARD, 1^ST FLOOR, BLOCK ‘B’ MC AND R.I COMPLEX, K. R. ROAD, BENGALURU - 560002.

…RESPONDENTS

(BY SRI. P.N.HATTI, HCGP FOR R1, R2 & R4; R3-SERVED)

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 OF CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO ISSUE A WRIT IN THE NATURE OF MANDAMUS DIRECTING THE RESPONDENT NO.3 TO CONSIDER THE REPRESENTATION DATED 25.11.2024 VIDE ANNEXURE-E1 AND DIRECTING THE RESPONDENT NO.4 TO CONSIDER THE REPRESENTATION DATED 25.11.2024 VIDE ANNEXURE-E AND REPRESENTATION DATED 30.11.2024 VIDE ANNEXURE-E2, IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY AND TO ISSUE WRIT IN THE NATURE OF MANDAMUS DIRECTING THE RESPONDENT NO.1 TO 4, TO PERMIT THE PETITIONER TO SECURE THE ADMISSION FOR THE ACADEMIC YEAR 2025-26 IN THE RESPONDENT NO.3 COLLEGE, ON COMPENSATE GROUND AS NO FAULT ON THE SAID OF PETITIONER AND THE PETITIONER HAS LOT PREVIOUS ACADEMIC.

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

3 -

NC: 2025:KHC-D:4145 WP No. 101079 of 2025

CORAM: THE HON'BLE MRS JUSTICE M.G.UMA

ORAL ORDER

The petitioner has approached this Court seeking the following reliefs:

A) To issue a writ in the nature of Mandamus directing the respondent No.3 to consider the representation dated 25.11.2024 vide AnnexureE1, and directing the respondent No.4 to consider the representation dated 25.11.2024 vide Annexure-E and representation dated 30.11.2024 vide Annexure-E2, in the interest of justice and equity.

B) To issue writ in the nature of Mandamus directing the Respondent No.1 to 4, to permit the petitioner to secure the admission for the academic year 2025-26 in the respondent No.3 College, on compensatory grounds as no fault on the said of petitioner and the petitioner has lost previous academic year.

4 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:4145 WP No. 101079 of 2025

C) Issue any other writ or direction as this Hon’ble

Court may deem fit in the interest of justice and equity.

Heard Sri. Raghavendra A. Purohit, learned

counsel for the petitioner and Sri.P.N.Hatti, learned HCGP for the respondent Nos.1, 2 and 4.

Perused the materials on record.

It is the contention of the learned counsel for

petitioner that, the petitioner was born on 11.11.1984 and he was only 35 years as on 10.09.2020 and therefore he was eligible to seek admission for the academic year 2025-26 with respondent No.3 – college. My attention was drawn to Annexure-A where terms and conditions of admission are highlighted. According to such terms, the maximum age for admission will be 35 years. Admittedly

the petitioner was born on 11.11.1984. Thus, as on 10.09.2020, he was aged 35 years, 9 months and 29 days. Thus completed 35 years as per terms and

5 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:4145 WP No. 101079 of 2025

conditions produced by petitioner himself, the maximum age limit to seek admission is 35 years. Therefore, prima facie the petitioner is not entitled to seek admission. Under these circumstances, I am of the opinion that writ petition is misconceived and the petitioner is not entitled for any relief.

Accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed.

Sd/(M.G.UMA) JUDGE

VB,EM CT:ANB List No.: 1 Sl No.: 19