Disposed¶30

Venkatesh Chandrasekhar Ayyar v. Amuktamalyada Mulakaluri

Karnataka HC5 Feb 2025WP/8111/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Karnataka High Court, Bengaluru; WP No. 8111 of 2024 (GM-FC); Hon'ble Smt. Justice Lalitha Kanneganti; decided 05.02.2025; Article 227 Constitution of India; custody and visitation; Family Court Bengaluru G and WC No. 357/2022 order dated 03.01.2024; settlement/compromise dated 13.12.2024; minor child Kavya; school admission direction; Transfer Certificate taken by mother (18.06.2024/25.06.2024); Shree Kumarans Children's Home; Vaishnavi Public School; writ petition disposed; all I.As. closed.

What did the court decide?

School authorities to consider the case of the student Kavya sympathetically, subject to availability of vacancy and the other rules of the school; writ petition disposed of in view of the settlement dated 13.12.2024; all I.As. in the writ petition closed. ¶30

Venkatesh Chandrasekhar Ayyar Vs Amuktamalyada… — Writ and Judicial Review | Karnataka HC (2025)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶30

Issue for consideration

Whether the order dated 03.01.2024 of the VI Addl. Principal Judge, Family Court, Bengaluru in G and WC No. 357/2022, insofar as it does not provide visitation rights/interim custody to the petitioner-father, is liable to be quashed. +1 more

¶14

Court's answer

In light of the orders passed in I.A.No.1/2025 and the settlement entered into between the parties dated 13.12.2024, the writ petition stands disposed of, and all I.As. in the writ petition stand closed.

¶30

Ratio / Principle

This Court generally will not pass directions to a school to give admission to a particular student, as it is the prerogative of the school to fix the criteria for admissions and to take decisions in the best interest of the school as well as the student.

¶25

Key takeaways

In view of the differences between the mother and the father — the girl having been made to travel, not attending classes, the TC taken by the mother, and her studying in that school since 2019 — the school authorities shall consider the case of the student Kavya sympathetically, subject to the availability of vacancy and the other rules of the school.ratio¶29

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Writ Petition (GM-FC) under Article 227 of the Constitution by the father against the order dated 03.01.2024 of the VI Addl. Principal Judge, Family Court, Bengaluru in G and WC No. 357/2022, insofar as it did not grant him visitation rights/interim custody. During pendency the parties settled (settlement dated 13.12.2024), custody resting with the father whenever the mother is not in the country. On I.A.No.1/2025 concerning the minor daughter Kavya's schooling — the mother having taken the Transfer Certificate from Shree Kumarans Children's Home (requested 18.06.2024, issued 25.06.2024) where the child studied since 2019, and later admitting her to Vaishnavi Public School — the Court held that it generally does not direct schools to admit particular students, fixation of admission criteria being the school's prerogative, but, given the parental discord and the child's continuity at the school, directed the school authorities to consider her case sympathetically subject to availability of vacancy and the school's rules. Writ petition disposed of; all I.As. closed.

¶1

¶2

NC: 2025:KHC:5269 WP No. 8111 of 2024

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶4

DATED THIS THE 5^TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2025

¶5

BEFORE

¶6

THE HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE LALITHA KANNEGANTI WRIT PETITION NO. 8111 OF 2024 (GM-FC)

¶7

BETWEEN:

¶8

VENKATESH CHANDRASEKHAR AYYAR SON OF SHRI CHANDRASEKHAR AYYAR, AGED ABOUT 51 YEARS, RESIDING AT APARTMENT NO. 32192, PRESTIGE FALCON CITY, ANJANADRI LAYOUT, BEHIND FORUM MALL, KONANAKUNTE CROSS, BENGALURU - 560 062.

¶9

…PETITIONER

¶10

(BY SRI. ARUN GOVINDRAJ, ADVOCATE)

¶11

AND:

¶12

Digitally signed by MEGHA MOHAN Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

¶13

AMUKTAMALYADA MULAKALURI WIFE OF SHRI VENKATESH, CHANDRASEKHAR AYYAR, AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS, RESIDING AT APARTMENT NO. 24301, PRESTIGE FALCON CITY, ANJANADRI LAYOUT, BEHIND FORUM MALL, KONNANAKUNTE CROSS, BENGALURU - 560 062

¶14

…RESPONDENT (BY SRI. KIRAN SEBASTIAN ROZARIO, ADVOCATE) THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO QUASH THE ORDER 03/01/2024 PASSED BY THE LERNED VI ADDL. PRINCIPAL JUDGE, FAMILY COURT, BENGALURU IN G AND WC NO. 357/2022, IN SO FAR AS IT DOES NOT PROVIDE VISITATION RIGHTS/ INTERIM CUSTODY TO THE PETITIONER (ANNEXURE-Y).

¶15

THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ‘PART- HEARD’, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:

¶16

¶17

NC: 2025:KHC:5269 WP No. 8111 of 2024

¶18

CORAM: HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE LALITHA KANNEGANTI

¶19

ORAL ORDER

¶20

I.A.No.1/2025 is filed stating that the girl was studying in respondent No.2/Shree Kumarans Children’s Home and when the parties have entered into compromise and when the passport was given to the father, he realized that the daughter was not studying in the said school from June 2024 where the mother had taken the TC from the school and after the settlement when the father approached the school authorities, they have stated that the TC is already been taken by the mother and they cannot give admission to the girl.

¶21

Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner/father submits that in view of the disputes between the parties, where the girl is studying from 2019 and because of the lapses on the part of the mother, now she is out of the school and there may be a direction to respondent No.2-school to give her admission which is in the interest of the minor, this Court had directed the petitioner to implead the school and directed to serve hand summons on the school.

¶22

3 - NC: 2025:KHC:5269 WP No. 8111 of 2024

¶23

Sri. Srinath B.G., Accountant and Admin of respondent No.2/School is present before this Court and submits that as the mother requested for the TC on 18.06.2024. They have issued the TC on 25.06.2024. It is submitted that when the next academic year starts in the month of June 2025, the children from Class II will be promoted to Class III and from Class III to Class IV. If at all any vacancies are available, the school will consider the case of the child Kavya.

¶24

Learned counsel appearing for respondent/mother submits that after taking the TC she admitted the girl to Vaishnavi Public School for III Standard.

¶25

Having heard the learned counsels on either side, perused the material on record. This Court generally will not pass directions to the school to give admission to a particular student. As it is a prerogative of the school to fix the criteria to give admissions and take decision in the best interest of the school as well as the student. But in this case in view of the differences between the mother and the father, a girl was made to travel from one place to the other and she was not even attending the classes and in the month of June 2021, the TC

¶26

4 - NC: 2025:KHC:5269 WP No. 8111 of 2024

¶27

was taken from the school by the mother. Thereafter, the parents have entered into compromise and now, the custody is given to the father, whenever the mother is not in the country. Considering the fact that the girl is studying in the particular school from the year 2019, this Court is passing the following:

¶28

ORDER

¶29

i. The school authorities shall consider the case of the student Kavya sympathetically subject to the availability of vacancy and the other rules of the school.

¶30

ii. In the light of the orders passed in I.A.No.1/2025 and in view of the settlement entered into between the parties dated 13.12.2024, the writ petition stands disposed off .

¶31

iii. All I.As., in the writ petition shall stand closed.

¶32

SD/(LALITHA KANNEGANTI) JUDGE

¶33

¶34

List No.: 1 Sl No.: 6

Venkatesh Chandrasekhar Ayyar v. Amuktamalyada Mulakaluri

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Venkatesh Chandrasekhar Ayyar v. Amuktamalyada Mulakaluri

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

K N Ramappa @ Rama Vs B v Narayanaswamy

Ramachandrappa Vs H G Basavarajappa

Shivalingamma Vs Ningamma

V S Raghavendra Vs C B Manjunath

Sri. Sadanand G Shastri Vs Sri. K. Venkateshwara Prasad

Sri. Narasimhaiah Vs Sri. Channaiah @ Mugaiah