Allowed¶84

Sri C T Jayanna v. the State of Karnataka

Karnataka HC17 Jun 2026WP/23497/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

WP No. 23497 of 2021 (S-RES), HC-KAR, NC: 2026:KHC:29664, decided 17.06.2026 by Justice Ashok S.Kinagi. Withdrawal of salary grant-in-aid of four Chitradurga college teachers by G.O. No. ED 271 UPC 2016 dt. 09.12.2021 quashed for violation of natural justice - passed without notice, enquiry or opportunity to be heard; Maneka Gandhi (1978) 1 SCC 248 relied upon; Articles 226/227 writ (certiorari); writ petition allowed with liberty to State to act afresh in accordance with law.

What did the court decide?

Writ petition allowed; impugned Government Order No. ED 271 UPC 2016 dated 09.12.2021 (Annexure-C) quashed insofar as the petitioners are concerned; liberty reserved to respondent No.1 to take appropriate action against the petitioners in accordance with law, if so desired; pending IA(s) disposed of. ¶84

Sri C T Jayanna Vs the State of Karnataka — Writ and Judicial Review | Karnataka HC (2026)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶84

Issue for consideration

Whether the impugned Government order dated 09.12.2021 withdrawing the salary grant-in-aid of the petitioners, passed by respondent No.1 without issuing any notice or holding any enquiry, violates the principles of natural justice and is liable to be quashed.

¶76

Court's answer

By virtue of the impugned order the petitioners' rights were affected; respondent No.1 passed it without issuing any notice, holding any enquiry, or giving a reasonable opportunity to be heard, in violation of the principles of natural justice and contrary to the mandate of Maneka Gandhi (supra).

¶76

Ratio / Principle

On this ground alone (violation of principles of natural justice), the impugned order is liable to be set aside.

¶76

Key takeaways

The writ petition is allowed; the impugned Government order No. ED 271 UPC 2016 dated 09.12.2021 (Annexure-C) is quashed; liberty is reserved to respondent No.1 to take appropriate action against the petitioners in accordance with law, if so desired; pending IA(s) stand disposed of.ratio¶84

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

High Court of Karnataka (Ashok S.Kinagi, J.), 17.06.2026, W.P. No. 23497 of 2021 (S-RES): Four teachers of S.J.M. Arts and Commerce College challenged the Government Order No. ED 271 UPC 2016 dated 09.12.2021 (Annexure-C) by which the State withdrew their salary grant-in-aid, following a complaint that their appointments had been made without Finance Department concurrence, though their appointments had been approved for grant-in-aid vide Government orders dated 17.09.2009 and 11.03.2010. Holding that respondent No.1 passed the impugned order without issuing any notice or holding any enquiry, thereby denying the petitioners a reasonable opportunity to be heard in violation of the principles of natural justice and contrary to the mandate of Maneka Gandhi v. Union of India, (1978) 1 SCC 248, the Court allowed the writ petition on this ground alone, quashed the impugned order, and reserved to the State liberty to take fresh action against the petitioners in accordance with law, if so desired.

¶1

¶2

NC: 2026:KHC:29664 WP No. 23497 of 2021

¶3

HC-KAR

¶4

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶5

DATED THIS THE 17^TH DAY OF JUNE, 2026

¶6

BEFORE

¶7

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK S.KINAGI WRIT PETITION NO. 23497 OF 2021 (S-RES)

¶8

BETWEEN:

¶9

SRI C T JAYANNA AGED ABOUT 48 YEARS S/O LATE SRI THIPPESWAMY WORKING AS ASSISTANT PROFESSOR IN KANNADA IN S J M ARTS, AND COMMERCE COLLEGE B.D. ROAD, CHITRADURGA TOWN CHITRADURGA DISTRICT-577501 R/O AT SRISHAILA MALLIKARJUNA NILAYA 2^ND CROSS, SHIVA LAYOUT THAMATAKAL ROAD CHITRADURGA TOWN CHITRADURGA DISTRICT-577502.

¶10

Digitally signed by KIRAN KUMAR R Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

¶11

SRI G.S. NAGARAJA AGED ABOUT 51 YEARS S/O LATE SRI SHARANAPPA G N WORKING AS LECTURER IN ECONOMICS IN S J M ARTS, AND COMMERCE COLLEGE B.D. ROAD, CHITRADURGA TOWN CHITRADURGA DISTRICT-577501. R/AT PALAVVANAHALLI HIRIYUR TALUK CHITRADURGA DISTRICT-577532.

¶12

SRI L. RAJA NAIK AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS S/O LATE SRI LIMBYA NAIK WORKING AS LECTURER IN POLITICAL SCIENCE IN S J M ARTS AND COMMERCE COLLEGE

¶13

¶14

NC: 2026:KHC:29664 WP No. 23497 of 2021

¶15

HC-KAR

¶16

B.D. ROAD, CHITRADURGA TOWN CHITRADURGA DISTRICT-577501 R/O MADAKARIPURA CHITRADURGA TOWN CHITRADURGA DISTRICT-577524.

¶17

SRI C. THIPPESWAMY AGED ABOUT 52 YEARS S/O CHIDANANDAPPA WORKING AS LECTURER IN ENGLISH IN S J M ARTS, AND COMMERCE COLLEGE TARIKERE TOWN CHICKAMAGALUR DISTRICT-577228. R/AT 4^TH CROSS, JOGI MATTI ROAD CHITRADURGA TOWN CHITRADURGA DISTRICT-577501.

¶18

…PETITIONERS

¶19

(BY SRI. HEGDE RAMACHANDRA SHIVARAM AND SRI. R.S. HEGDE, ADVOCATES)

¶20

AND:

¶21

THE STATE OF KARNATAKA REPRESENTED BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY DEPARTMENT OF HIGHER EDUCATION (COLLEGIATE EDUCATION) M.S. BUILDING BENGALURU-560001.

¶22

THE COMMISSIONER DEPARTMENT OF COLLEGIATE AND TECHINICAL EDUACTION, PALACE ROAD BENGALURU-560001.

¶23

THE REGIONAL JOINT DIRECTOR OFFICE OF THE REGIONAL JOINT DIRECTOR DEPARTMENT OF COLLEGIATE EDUCATION MATHUR ROAD

¶24

SHIVAMOGGA TOWN SHIVAMOGGA DISTRICT-577203.

¶25

3 - NC: 2026:KHC:29664 WP No. 23497 of 2021

¶26

HC-KAR

¶27

S.J.M. VIDHYA PEETHA (R) SRI MURUGHA MATH (BRAHAN MATH), REGISTERED TRUST CHITRADURGA TOWN-577502 CHITRADURGA DISTRICT REP. BY ITS SECRETARY.

¶28

THE PRINCIPAL S.J.M. ARTS, SCIENCE AND COMMERCE COLLEGE B.D. ROAD, CHITRADURGA TOWN-577501 CHITRADURGA DISTRICT.

¶29

THE PRINCIPAL S.J.M. ARTS AND COMMERCE COLLEGE TARIKERE TOWN CHIKAMAGALUR DISTRICT-577228.

¶30

…RESPONDENTS

¶31

(BY SRI. G. RAMESH NAIK, AGA FOR R1 TO R3; SRI. B.S. MURALI, ADVOCATE FOR R4 TO R6)

¶32

THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE IMPUGNED GOVERNMENT ORDER DATED 09.12.2021 ISSUED BY R1 VIDE ANNEXURE-C IN SO FAR AS PETITIONERS ARE CONCERNED AND ETC.

¶33

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

¶34

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK S.KINAGI

¶35

¶36

NC: 2026:KHC:29664 WP No. 23497 of 2021

¶37

HC-KAR

¶38

ORAL ORDER

¶39

The petitioners filed this writ petition seeking the

¶40

following reliefs:

¶41

“a) Call for records from the respondents relating to case of the petitioners, and examine and

¶42

b) Issue writ in the nature of certiorari or any other appropriate writ order direction to quash the impugned Govt. Order No. ED 271 UPC 2016, Bengaluru, dated 09.12.2021 issued by respondent No.1 vide Annexure-C in so far as petitioners are concerned; and

¶43

c) Issue any other appropriate writ order direction as deemed just and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case including the costs of the proceedings in the interest of justice and equity.”

¶44

Brief facts leading rise to the filing of this

¶45

petition are as follows:

¶46

2.1. Respondent No.1-State issued a Government

¶47

order dated 17.09.2009 according approval for salary grant-in-aid and appointment of petitioner Nos.1, 3 and 4 in respondent No.5-College by the respondent No.4Management. Respondent No.4-Management issued

¶48

5 - NC: 2026:KHC:29664 WP No. 23497 of 2021

¶49

HC-KAR

¶50

appointment orders in favour of petitioner Nos.1, 3 and 4 pursuant to the Government order dated 17.09.2009 according approval for salary grant-in-aid and appointment of petitioner Nos.1, 3 and 4 for salary grant from the salary grant-in-aid of the State Government. Petitioner Nos.1, 3 and 4 were initially appointed on 01.07.1997, 01.07.1996 and 01.07.2000 respectively. Respondent No.1-State issued an order dated 11.03.2010 according approval for salary grant-in-aid and appointment of petitioner No.2 in respondent No.5-College by respondent No.4-Management and respondent No.4Management has issued the appointment order to petitioner No.2 for salary grant from the salary grand-inaid of the State Government. Petitioner No.2 was initially appointed on 01.07.1998. Respondent No.1-State has passed an order withdrawing the salary grant-in-aid insofar as the petitioners are concerned by way of Government order dated 09.12.2021. The petitioners,

¶51

¶52

NC: 2026:KHC:29664 WP No. 23497 of 2021

¶53

HC-KAR

¶54

aggrieved by the impugned Government order dated 09.12.2021 vide Annexure-C, filed this writ petition.

¶55

The respondents filed a statement of objections

¶56

denying the averments made in the memorandum of writ petition and admitted regarding the appointment of the petitioners in respondent No.5-College. It is contended that, one Sri. L.Nagaraj, Advocate submitted a complaint to the Government alleging that the appointment orders have been issued without concurrence of the Finance Department and as such, sought for withdrawal of the said orders. The action of the respondents in withdrawing the grant-in-aid to the petitioners is legal. Hence, prays to dismiss the writ petition.

¶57

Heard the arguments of the learned counsel for

¶58

the petitioners, learned AGA for respondent Nos.1 to 3 and learned counsel for respondent Nos.4 to 6.

¶59

Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that, before passing of the impugned order by the

¶60

7 - NC: 2026:KHC:29664 WP No. 23497 of 2021

¶61

HC-KAR

¶62

respondents, no enquiry was held. The said order is in violation of principles of natural justice. To buttress his argument, he has placed reliance on the judgment of the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Maneka Gandhi Vs. Union of India and Another¹ . The impugned order passed by respondent No.1 is in violation of principles of natural justice. Hence, on this ground, he prays to allow the writ petition.

¶63

Per contra , learned AGA supported the impugned order, and prays to dismiss the writ petition.

¶64

Perused the records and considered the submissions of the learned counsel for the parties.

¶65

It is an undisputed fact that the petitioners

¶66

were appointed in respondent No.5-College institution and petitioner Nos.1, 3, 4 and 2 are serving there since from 01.07.1997, 01.07.1996, 01.07.2000 and 01.07.1998

¶67

1 (1978) 1 SCC 248

¶68

8 - NC: 2026:KHC:29664 WP No. 23497 of 2021

¶69

HC-KAR

¶70

respectively. Their appointments were admitted for grant-in-aid vide Government order dated 17.09.2009.

¶71

Respondent No.1, without issuing any notice or

¶72

holding any enquiry, has passed the impugned order. The impugned order passed by respondent No.1 is contrary to the proposition of law laid down by the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Maneka Gandhi (supra), wherein the Hon'ble Apex Court has held that, a substantive and procedural laws and actions taken under them will have to pass tests under Article 14 of the Constitution of India. The tests of reasons and justice cannot be abstract. They cannot be divorced from the needs of the nation. They have to be pragmatic. Otherwise, they would cease to be reasonable. The procedure prescribed must be just, fair and reasonable even though there is no specific provision to be taken against an individual which affects the right of that individual, the duty to give a reasonable opportunity to be heard will be implied from the nature of the function to be performed by the authority. It is thereby

¶73

9 - NC: 2026:KHC:29664 WP No. 23497 of 2021

¶74

HC-KAR

¶75

conclusively held by the Hon'ble Apex Court that, the principles of natural justice are part of Article 14 of the Constitution and procedure prescribed by law must be just, fair and reasonable.

¶76

Admittedly, by virtue of the impugned order, the right of the individuals i.e., the petitioners has been affected. Respondent No.1, without giving a reasonable opportunity to be heard, has passed the impugned order, which is in violation of principles of natural justice and contrary to the mandate laid down by the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Maneka Gandhi (supra). Hence, on this ground alone, the impugned order is liable to be set aside.

¶77