Disposed

Ms. Keerthana Thomas v. the State of Karnataka

Karnataka HC2 Mar 2026WP/155/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This order examined two writ petitions challenging mandatory service bonds and non-release of documents by an educational college. The court disposed of both petitions without deciding merits, directing the college to consider pending representations with specific timelines and procedural requirements.

What did the court decide?

Director of college directed to consider bond cancellation representation within three months and to permit one more representation on documents with reasons within three months of receipt.

Ms. Keerthana Thomas Vs the State of Karnataka — Education and Admissions | Karnataka HC (2026)

¶1

¶2

NC: 2026:KHC:12507 WP NO.155 OF 2024 C/W WP NO.20609 OF 2023

¶3

HC-KAR

¶4

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶5

DATED THIS THE 02^ND DAY OF MARCH, 2026

¶6

BEFORE

¶7

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE E.S. INDIRESH WRIT PETITION NO.155 OF 2024 (EDN-RES) C/W

¶8

WRIT PETITION NO.20609 OF 2023 (EDN-RES)

¶9

IN WP No.155/2024

¶10

BETWEEN:

¶11

MS. KEERTHANA THOMAS D/O THOMAS VARGHESE, AGED ABOUT 26 YEARS, KATTUPARAMBIL HOUSE C.K., DAMODARAN ROAD, EROOR NORTH, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT, KERALA - 682 306.

¶12

…PETITIONER

¶13

(BY SRI. VINCENT P.J., ADVOCATE)

¶14

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

¶15

AND:

¶16

THE STATE OF KARNATAKA REP. BY THE CHIEF SECRETARY, VIDHANA SOUDHA , DR. AMBEDKAR VEEDHI, BENGALURU - 560 001.

¶17

RAJIV GANDHI UNIVERSITY OF HEALTH SCIENCES 4^TH 'T' BLOCK EAST, PATTABHIRAMA NAGAR, JAYANAGAR, BENGALURU - 560 041. REP. BY ITS VICE CHANCELLOR.

¶18

¶19

NC: 2026:KHC:12507 WP NO.155 OF 2024 C/W WP NO.20609 OF 2023

¶20

HC-KAR

¶21

M/S ST. JOHNS MEDICAL COLLEGE (UNIT OF CBCI SOCIETY FOR MEDICAL EDUCATION) SARJAPUR - MARATHAHALLI ROAD, BESIDE BANK OF BARODA, JOHN NAGAR, KORAMANGALA, BENGALURU - 560 034. REP. BY ITS ASSOCIATE DIRECTOR.

¶22

…RESPONDENTS

¶23

(BY SMT. SUKANYA BALIGA B., AGA FOR R1; SMT. ANUPARNA BARDOLOI, ADVOCATE FOR R2; SRI. P.N. MANAMOHAN, ADVOCATE FOR R3)

¶24

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO DIRECT THE RESPONDENT NO.3 TO CONSIDER THE REPRESENTATION MADE BY THE PETITIONER DATED 19^TH NOVEMBER, 2023 VIDE ANNEXURE-G; DIRECT THE RESPONDENT NO.3 NOT TO IMPLEMENT THE BOND EXECUTED BY THE PETITIONER AS THE SAME IS VIOLATIVE OF ARTICLE 14 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA AND THEREBY EMANCIPATE THE PETITIONER FROM THE BOND EXECUTED; AND ETC.

¶25

IN WP No.20609/2023

¶26

BETWEEN:

¶27

MS. MILENIYA MARIYA VINCENT D/O VINCENT PAUL S., MELEVEETIL VYASAPURAM, AVALOOKUNNU P.O., ALAPPUZHA, KERALA - 688 006.

¶28

…PETITIONER

¶29

(BY SRI. VINCENT P.J., ADVOCATE)

¶30

AND:

¶31

THE STATE OF KARNATAKA REP. BY THE CHIEF SECRETARY, VIDHANA SOUDHA , DR. AMBEDKAR VEEDHI, BENGALURU - 560 001.

¶32

¶33

NC: 2026:KHC:12507 WP NO.155 OF 2024 C/W

¶34

WP NO.20609 OF 2023

¶35

HC-KAR

¶36

RAJIV GANDHI UNIVERSITY OF HEALTH SCIENCES 4^TH 'T' BLOCK EAST, PATTABHIRAMA NAGAR, JAYANAGAR, BENGALURU - 560 041. REP. BY ITS VICE CHANCELLOR.

¶37

M/S ST. JOHNS MEDICAL COLLEGE (UNIT OF CBCI SOCIETY FOR MEDICAL EDUCATION) SARJAPUR - MARATHAHALLI ROAD, BESIDE BANK OF BARODA, JOHN NAGAR, KORAMANGALA, BENGALURU - 560 034. REP. BY ITS ASSOCIATE DIRECTOR.

¶38

…RESPONDENTS

¶39

(BY SMT. SUKANYA BALIGA B., AGA FOR R1; SMT. ANUPARNA BARDOLOI, ADVOCATE FOR R2; SRI. P.N. MANAMOHAN, ADVOCATE FOR R3)

¶40

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO QUASH THE ENDORSEMENT DATED 18^TH AUGUST, 2023 ISSUED BY THE RESPONDENT NO.3 VIDE ANNEXURE-E; QUASH THE BOND OBTAINED BY THE RESPONDENT NO.3 AT THE TIME OF ADMISSION TO THE COLLEGE WITHOUT ANY AUTHORITY OR RULE; DIRECT THE RESPONDENT NO.3 TO RETURN ALL THE ORIGINAL TESTIMONIALS TO THE PETITIONER WITHIN THE TIME FIXED BY THIS HON'BLE COURT; AND ETC.

¶41

THESE PETITIONS, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE E.S. INDIRESH

¶42

ORAL ORDER

¶43

The grievance of petitioners in these writ petitions is with

¶44

regard to cancellation of Bond executed by them to conduct

¶45

4 - NC: 2026:KHC:12507 WP NO.155 OF 2024 C/W WP NO.20609 OF 2023

¶46

HC-KAR

¶47

Rural Service after completion of the their Medical course as the execution of the same is violative of Article 14 of the Constitution of India.

¶48

Heard Sri. Vincent P.J., learned counsel appearing for petitioners and Smt. Sukanya Baliga B., learned Additional Government Advocate appearing for respondent No.1; Smt. Anuparna Bardoloi, learned counsel appearing for the respondent No.2; and Sri. P.N. Manamohan, learned counsel appearing for the respondent No.3

¶49

Having heard the learned counsel appearing for the parties, the same would indicate the petitioner in Writ Petition No.155 of 2024 has filed her representation to the respondent No.3, seeking cancellation of the Bond executed by her. Therefore, without expressing any opinion on merits of the case, the respondent No.3 is directed to consider the said representation dated 19^th November, 2023 (Annexure-G) in accordance with law within an outer limit of three months from the date of receipt of this order.

¶50

Insofar as the petitioner in Writ Petition No.20609 of 2023 is concerned, the petitioner has filed her representation

¶51

5 - NC: 2026:KHC:12507 WP NO.155 OF 2024 C/W WP NO.20609 OF 2023

¶52

HC-KAR

¶53

to the respondent No.3, seeking release of her original certificates. In turn, the respondent No.3 vide communication dated 18^th August, 2023 (Annexure-E) demanded the Bond Amount from the petitioner to release the original certificates. In this regard, on perusal of communication dated 18^th August, 2023 (Annexure-E) would indicate that, the respondent No.3 had not given sufficient reasons for rejecting the representation made by the petitioner for releasing her original certificates. Therefore, the petitioner is permitted to make one more representation to the respondent No.3 within two weeks from the date of receipt of this order and the respondent No.3 shall consider the representation that may be made by the petitioner and take decision in the matter in accordance with law by providing reasons, within an outer limit of three months from the date of receipt of such representation.

¶54

Accordingly, writ petitions are disposed of.

¶55

SD/(E.S.INDIRESH) JUDGE

¶56

ARK List No.: 1 Sl No.: 37

Ms. Keerthana Thomas v. the State of Karnataka

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ms. Keerthana Thomas v. the State of Karnataka

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Shriram General Insurance Co. Ltd., Vs Sumitra and Ors.

Ummedsingh Vs Asif and Anr.

The Divisional Manager the United India Insurance Company Limited Vs Dr. Neelkant @ Dr. Neelkant Chanshetty S/O Madivalappa and Anr.

Govindaraju H a Vs the Registrar

C Krishnaiah Vs the State of Karnataka

Kum. Ashwini H K Vs State of Karnataka