Disposed¶36

Smt. Rajeshwari. C v. the State of Karnataka

Karnataka HC16 Sept 2025WP/27927/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Maintainability of writ petition; service matter; civil post; FDA; Department of Women and Child Welfare; Karnataka State Administrative Tribunal; L.Chandra Kumar (1997) 3 SCC 261 relied on; Articles 226 and 227 Constitution of India; quashing of endorsement dated 21.08.2025 (No NI.SI. PRA/MA.U/01/2023-24, Annexure-A); writ petition disposed of with liberty to approach appropriate legal forum; Registry to return documents; Karnataka High Court; H.T. Narendra Prasad, J.; 16 September 2025.

What did the court decide?

Liberty reserved to the petitioner to approach the appropriate legal forum, if law permits; Registry directed to return the original or certified copies of the documents, if any, to the petitioner after retaining photocopies for record purpose. ¶36

Smt. Rajeshwari. C Vs the State of Karnataka — Writ and Judicial Review | Karnataka HC (2025)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶36

Issue for consideration

Whether the writ petition is maintainable before the writ Court, given that the petitioner is working as a FDA in the Department of Women and Child Welfare, a civil post, and therefore must approach the Karnataka State Administrative Tribunal.

¶28

Court's answer

The grievance in respect of service matters cannot be a subject matter of adjudication at the hands of a writ Court, as the court of first instance, in the light of the decision of the Apex Court in L.Chandra Kumar vs. Union of India and others, (1997) 3 SCC 261.

¶30

Ratio / Principle

In view of the above, the writ petition is disposed of, with liberty reserved to the petitioner to approach the appropriate legal forum, if law permits.

¶36

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Writ Petition No. 27927 of 2025 (S-RES), High Court of Karnataka at Bengaluru, decided on 16 September 2025 by H.T. Narendra Prasad, J. The petitioner, Smt. Rajeshwari C, working as a FDA in the Department of Women and Child Welfare, filed a petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India seeking quashing of an endorsement dated 21.08.2025 in No NI.SI. PRA/MA.U/01/2023-24 issued by the 3rd respondent (Annexure-A). On preliminary hearing, the learned AGA raised a preliminary objection on maintainability, contending that the petitioner holds a civil post and must approach the Karnataka State Administrative Tribunal. Relying on L.Chandra Kumar vs. Union of India and others, (1997) 3 SCC 261, the Court held that grievances relating to service matters cannot be adjudicated by a writ Court as the court of first instance, and disposed of the writ petition with liberty to the petitioner to approach the appropriate legal forum, if law permits. The Registry was directed to return the original or certified copies of documents to the petitioner after retaining photocopies for record.

¶1

NC: 2025:KHC:36831 WP No. 27927 of 2025

¶2

¶3

HC-KAR

¶4

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶5

DATED THIS THE 16^TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2025

¶6

BEFORE

¶7

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE H.T. NARENDRA PRASAD WRIT PETITION NO. 27927 OF 2025 (S-RES)

¶8

BETWEEN:

¶9

SMT. RAJESHWARI. C W/O LATE SRI M G MAHESH AGED ABOUT 48 YEARS R/AT NO.1727, C.H. - 33, 13TH CROSS ASHOKAPURAM, MYSURU 3 570008.

¶10

&PETITIONER

¶11

(BY SRI. C PRAKASH., ADVOCATE)

¶12

AND:

¶13

THE STATE OF KARNATAKA REPRESENTED BY ITS CHIEF SECRETARY VIDHANASOUDHA DR. B.R. AMBEDKAR VEEDI BENGALURU 3 560001.

¶14

THE SECRETARY DEPARTMENT OF WOMEN AND CHILD WELFARE VIDHANA SOUDHA

¶15

Digitally signed by HEMALATHA A Location: HIGH COURTOF KARNATAKA

¶16

DR. B.R. AMBEDKAR VEEDHI BENGALURU 3 560001.

¶17

THE DIRECTOR DEPARTMENT OF WOMEN AND CHILD WELFARE OFFICE OF THE DIRECTOR ANAND RAO CIRCLE BENGALURU 3 560009.

¶18

SMT. SOWBHAGYAMMA W/O GURUMALLAIAH AGED ABOUT 64 YEARS

¶19

2 - NC: 2025:KHC:36831 WP No. 27927 of 2025

¶20

HC-KAR

¶21

RESIDING AT NO. 264 10TH CROSS, SEWAGE FORM ROAD KANAKAGIRI, MYSURU - 570008

¶22

&RESPONDENTS

¶23

(BY SRI.VIKAS R., AGA FOR R1 TO R3)

¶24

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE ENDORSEMENT DATED 21.08.2025 IN NO NI.SI. PRA/MA.U/01/2023-24 ISSUED BY THE 3^rd RESPONDENT AS PER ANNEXURE -A AND ETC.

¶25

THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE H.T. NARENDRA PRASAD

¶26

ORAL ORDER

¶27

At the outset, learned AGA raised a preliminary

¶28

objection regarding maintainability of the writ petition on the ground that the petitioner is working as a FDA in Department of Women and Child Welfare, which is a

¶29

civil post and therefore, he has to approach the Karnataka State Administrative Tribunal.

¶30

The grievance in respect of the 8service matters9 cannot be a subject matter of adjudication at the

¶31

3 - NC: 2025:KHC:36831 WP No. 27927 of 2025

¶32

HC-KAR

¶33

hands of a writ Court, as the court of first instance, in

¶34

the light of the decision of the Apex Court in the case

¶35

of L.Chandra Kumar vs. Union of India and others reported in (1997) 3 SCC 261.

¶36

In view of the above, the writ petition is disposed of , with liberty reserved to the petitioner to approach the appropriate legal forum, if law permits.

¶37

Registry is directed to return the original or certified copies of the documents, if any, to the petitioner, after retaining the photocopies of the same for record purpose.

¶38

Sd/(H.T. NARENDRA PRASAD) JUDGE

¶39

DM LIST NO.: 1 SL NO.: 7

Smt. Rajeshwari. C v. the State of Karnataka

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Smt. Rajeshwari. C v. the State of Karnataka

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Dr S Pradeep Vs the State of Karnataka

Sri. Gous Inamdar, Vs Bangalore Water Supply and Sewerage Board

Mahadevu Vs Mysore City Corporation

Smt. Netravathi M.S Vs State of Karnataka

Sri.Ramesh Vs the State of Karnataka

Sri.M.S. Lakshmana Gowda Vs the State of Karnataka