Margadarshan Education Trust Vs Deputy Commissioner/President

MARGADARSHAN EDUCATION TRUST ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICE AT: NO.23 AND 31/1, 9^TH CROSS, HARSHA LAYOUT, KENGERI, BENGALURU - 560 060. REP. BY ITS TRUSTY, SRI. RAKSHIT V.K AGED ABOUT 30 YOURS.

¶10

HAVING ITS COLLEGE AT: MARGADARSHAN HOSPITAL AND COLLEGE OF NURSING HERUR ROAD, TONDIHAL, ILKAL TALUK, BAGALKOT DISTRICT - 587 154.

¶11

…PETITIONER

¶12

(BY SRI. SHIVARUDRA, ADVOCATE)

¶13

Digitally signed by CHAYA S A Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

¶14

AND:

¶15

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER / PRESIDENT KPME AUTHORITY, BAGALKOTE - 587 101.

¶16

THE REGISTRAR RGUHS, 4^TH 'T' BLOCK, JAYANAGAR, BENGALURU - 560 041.

¶17

…RESPONDENTS

¶18

(BY SRI. YOGESH D. NAIK, AGA FOR R1; SMT. MAMATHA KULKARNI, ADVOCATE FOR R2)

¶19

2 -

¶20

NC: 2026:KHC:22142 WP NO.10361 OF 2026

¶21

HC-KAR

¶22

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO QUASH THE LETTER DATED 09^TH JANUARY, 2026 ISSUED BY THE RESPONDENT NO.2 VIDE ANNEXURE-F; DIRECT THE RESPONDENT NO.2 NOT TO INSIST UPON THE LETTER ISSUED BY RESPONDENT NO.1 AS THE SAME IS STAYED BY THIS HON'BLE COURT ON 31^ST JULY, 2025 IN WRIT PETITION NO.19936 OF 2025 VIDE ANNEXURE-D; AND ETC.

¶23

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

¶24

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE E.S. INDIRESH

¶25

ORAL ORDER

¶26

In this petition, the petitioner is assailing the letter dated 09^th January, 2026 (Annexure-F), wherein the respondent No.2University, declined to continue affiliation of the College run by the petitioner-Trust for the Academic Year 2026-27.

¶27

Heard Sri. Shivarudra, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner; Sri. Yogesh D. Naik, learned Additional Government Advocate appearing for the respondent No.1; and Smt. Mamatha Kulkarni, learned counsel appearing for the respondent No.2.

¶28

Sri. Shivarudra, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner refers to the interim Order dated 31^st July, 2025 granted by this Court in Writ Petition No.19936 of 2025 and

¶29

3 -

¶30

NC: 2026:KHC:22142 WP NO.10361 OF 2026

¶31

HC-KAR

¶32

submits that, the said interim order of stay has been intimated to the respondent No.2-University. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner further contended that, though the respondent No.2-University was well aware about the interim order passed by this Court, without application of mind, issued impugned communication dated 09^th January, 2026 (AnnexureF), directing the petitioner not to make any admission for the B.Sc Nursing Course from the Academic year 2026-27, which is bad in law. Accordingly, he sought for interference of this Court.

¶33

Per contra, Smt. Mamatha Kulkarni, learned counsel appearing for the respondent No.2-University pointed out the deficiencies in the Hospital/College run by petitioner-Trust and submitted that the name of the Hospital/College run by the petitioner is not displayed in Karnataka Private Medical Establishments Website. Therefore, learned counsel appearing for the respondent No.2-University argued that the continuation of affiliation for the Academic year 2026-27 was rejected on the ground of not adhering to the norms. Accordingly, she sought for dismissal of petition.

¶34

4 -

¶35

NC: 2026:KHC:22142 WP NO.10361 OF 2026

¶36

HC-KAR

¶37

Sri. Yogesh D. Naik, learned Additional Government Advocate submits that the petitioner-Trust challenged the order passed by the respondent No.1 in the writ petition referred to above and therefore, the present writ petition has to be considered independent of the order passed in aforesaid writ petition in which interim stay has been granted.

¶38

In the light of the submission made by learned counsel appearing for parties, on perusal of the averments made in writ petition, the same would indicate that the respondents have accorded permission to the petitioner to establish the Hospital/College in question by issuing the Certificate of Registration on 24^th November, 2022 (AnnexureB) as per the Karnataka Private Medical Establishment (Amended) Act, 2018 (for short, hereinafter referred to as 'KPME(A) Act' ). It is also forthcoming from the writ petition that, this Court by order dated 31^st July, 2025, stayed the order dated 24^th June, 2025 passed by the respondent No.1 herein under the KPME(A) Act. In this regard, as submitted by learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, though the respondent-University was not a party to the aforesaid petition, however, it was intimated on 25^th November, 2025 about the

¶39

5 -

¶40

NC: 2026:KHC:22142 WP NO.10361 OF 2026

¶41

HC-KAR

¶42

interim order passed by this Court. Therefore, the ends of justice would be met, if the impugned letter dated 09^th January, 2026 (Annexure-F) issued by the respondent No.2-University is set-aside and direction be issued for conducting fresh joint inspection by the respondents herein with the prior intimation to the petitioner and take decision in the matter in accordance with law. Ordered accordingly.

¶43

It is made clear that, the entire exercise shall be completed within four weeks from the date of receipt of this order and the observation made by this Court in the present writ petition do not come in the way for adjudicating Writ Petition No.19936 of 2025, wherein, order dated 24^th June, 2025 passed by the respondent No.1 is challenged.

¶44

It is also to be noted that, after the receipt of report of joint inspection, the respondents shall take decision in the matter within a period of three weeks. Accordingly, writ petition is disposed of.

¶45

SD/(E.S.INDIRESH) JUDGE

¶46

ARK List No.: 2 Sl No.: 39

Margadarshan Education Trust v. Deputy Commissioner/President

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Margadarshan Education Trust v. Deputy Commissioner/President

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

Sri Mohan Kumar P N Vs the Registrar of Co. Operative Societies

Smt.S.K.Sujayakantha Vs M/S.Estellar Constructions Private Ltd.

Sri. R Krishna Murthy Vs M/S Aircel Limited

Shri. Naveen C N Vs State of Karnataka

Madesha P @ Appy Vs State by Chandra Layout

Subrata Bera Vs State of Karnataka