Dismissed¶42

Shri K Y Venkatesh v. Union of India

Mandamus – Arjuna Award

Karnataka HC18 Nov 2025WP/34244/2025

Download

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Arjuna Award (life time); mandamus; Article 226 Constitution of India; discretionary conferment of award; vested right; mala fides; para-athlete retired 2012; Ministry of Youth Affairs and Sports; Selection Committee for Arjuna Award; Ministry of Social Justice and Empowerment; Union of India; application dated 03.10.2025 Annexure-E; High Court of Karnataka; WP No. 34244 of 2025 (GM-RES); Justice Suraj Govindaraj; order dated 18-11-2025; writ petition dismissed.

What did the court decide?

Since no mala fides have been urged either as regards non-conferring of the Arjuna Award on the petitioner or conferring it on any other person, there cannot be a vested right in the petitioner giving rise to a mandamus to the respondents to consider his application. ¶40

Shri K Y Venkatesh Vs Union of India — Writ and Judicial Review | Karnataka HC (2025)

¶1

¶2

NC: 2025:KHC:47297 WP No. 34244 of 2025

¶3

HC-KAR

¶4

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶5

DATED THIS THE 18^TH DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2025

¶6

BEFORE

¶7

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURAJ GOVINDARAJ WRIT PETITION NO. 34244 OF 2025 (GM-RES)

¶8

BETWEEN:

¶9

SHRI K.Y.VENKATESH, S/O LATE DR. K.R.Y.IYENGAR, AGED ABOUT 57 YEARS, NO.54, 11^TH MAIN, 16^TH CROSS, MALLESHWARAM WEST, BENGALURU – 560 055.

¶10

…PETITIONER

¶11

(BY SRI. SAMPATH A., ADVOCATE)

¶12

AND:

¶13

Digitally signed by SHWETHA RAGHAVENDRA Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

¶14

UNION OF INDIA, MINISTRY OF YOUTH AFFAIRS AND SPORTS, SHASTRI BHAWAN, NEW DELHI – 110 001, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY.

¶15

SELECTION COMMITTEE FOR “ARJUNA AWARD”, MINISTRY OF YOUTH AFFAIRS AND SPORTS, SHASTRI BHAWAN, NEW DELHI – 110 001, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY.

¶16

2 - NC: 2025:KHC:47297 WP No. 34244 of 2025

¶17

HC-KAR

¶18

MINISTRY OF SOCIAL JUSTILCE

¶19

AND EMPOWERMENT, ROOM NO.637, A-WING, SHASTRI BHAWAN, NEW DELHI – 110 001, REPRESENTED BY SECRETARY.

¶20

…RESPONDENTS

¶21

(BY SRI. ARVIND KAMATH, ASGI FOR SMT. SINCHANA M. R., ADVOCATE)

¶22

THIS W.P. IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO ISSUE A WRIT OF MANDAMUS TO THE RESPONDENTS TO CONSIDER THE APPLICATION OF THE PETITIONER AT ANNEXURE-E DTD. 03.10.2025 IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW.

¶23

THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:

¶24

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURAJ GOVINDARAJ

¶25

ORAL ORDER

¶26

Petitioner is before this court seeking for the following reliefs:

¶27

“A. Issue a writ of Mandamus to the respondents to consider the application of the petitioner at Annexure-E dtd. 03.10.2025 in accordance with law.

¶28

B. Pass such other orders as this Hon’ble Court deems fit in the facts and circumstances of the above case.”

¶29

The petitioner claims to be a para-athlete who retired

¶30

from active sports in the year 2012 and thereafter has

¶31

¶32

NC: 2025:KHC:47297 WP No. 34244 of 2025

¶33

HC-KAR

¶34

been involved in various socio-cultural, educational and sporting initiatives. The petitioner has won several medals in various events that he has participated in.

¶35

The petitioner is now before this Court contending that his application for awardal of the Arjuna Award (life time) had been rejected and the present application has not been considered.

¶36

In that background, the petitioner is before this Court seeking for a mandamus to direct the respondents to consider the application of the petitioner dated 03.10.2025 at Annexure-E.

¶37

A perusal of the pleadings filed indicates that the petitioner is a meritorious person, who has won several medals in various events that he has participated in. Be that as it may, the conferment of Arjuna Award is the discretion of the concerned authorities. There is no mala fides which have been urged by the petitioner in the present matter as regards both the non-conferring of the

¶38

4 - NC: 2025:KHC:47297 WP No. 34244 of 2025

¶39

HC-KAR

¶40

award on the petitioner and/or conferring of the said award on any other person. That being so, there cannot be a vested right in the petitioner, which can give rise to a mandamus being issued to the respondents to consider the said application.

¶41

As aforesaid, the conferment or otherwise of the Arjuna Award is purely discretionary and unless the same is tainted with any mala fides , the petitioner cannot seek for any reliefs in respect thereto.

¶42

In that view of the matter, the petition stands dismissed .

¶43

Needless to say, the dismissal of the present Writ Petition will not come in the way of the respondents considering the candidature of the petitioner for any title or award.

¶44

SD/(SURAJ GOVINDARAJ) JUDGE

¶45

CBC

¶46

List No.: 1 Sl No.: 19/CT:SS

Shri K Y Venkatesh v. Union of India

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Shri K Y Venkatesh v. Union of India

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sri. Venu. D. S. Vs the State of Karnataka

A Hanumantha Char Vs the State of Karnataka

M/S Rosmerta Technologies Limited Vs State of Karnataka

Smt. Mannamma Vs the State of Karnataka

Ms J R Shanthala Vs the State of Karnataka

Kolar District Driving Schools Owners Association Vs State of Karnataka