Sri.Ananthakumar Vs State of Karnataka

SRI. ANANTHAKUMAR S/O LATE VENKATARAYAPPA AGE ABOUT 48 YEARS RESIDING AT ANAKANUR VILLAGE PATRENHALLI POST, KASABA HOBLI CHIKKABALLAPURA TALUK AND DISTRICT 562101

¶13

Digitally signed by NAGARAJA B M Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

¶14

(BY SRI. S R SREEPRASAD., ADVOCATE)

¶15

…PETITIONER

¶16

AND:

¶17

STATE OF KARNATAKA BY ITS SECRETARY REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND FAMILY WELFARE SERVICES VIDHANA SOUDHA, BENGALURU 560001.

¶18

2 - NC: 2026:KHC:15016 WP No. 2566 of 2026 C/W WP No. 2249 of 2026

¶19

HC-KAR

¶20

THE DIRECTOR

¶21

HEALTH AND FAMILY WELFARE SERVICES

¶22

AROGYA SOUDHA MAGADI ROAD BENGALURU - 560023.

¶23

THE DISTRICT SURGEON/MEDICAL SUPERINTENDENT CHIKKABALLAPUR GOVERNMENT HOSPITAL CHIKKABALLAPUR - 562101.

¶24

…RESPONDENTS

¶25

(BY SRI. ADITYA DIWAKARA, AGA)

¶26

THIS WRIT PETITION FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO-DIRECT THE RESPONDENTS TO CONSIDER THE REPRESENTATION VIDE ANNX-C DATED 01.09.2025 AND TO PASS APPROPRIATE ORDERS.

¶27

IN WP NO. 2249/2026 BETWEEN:

¶28

SRI.PRAKASH SON OF LATE HANUMANTHU AGED ABOUT 59 YEARS ARUR VILLAGE, MANDIKAL HOBLI CHIKKABALLAPUR TALUK AND DISTRICT-562101.

¶29

...PETITIONER

¶30

(BY SRI. S R SREEPRASAD., ADVOCATE)

¶31

AND:

¶32

STATE OF KARNATAKA BY ITS SECRETARY REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND FAMILY WELFARE SERVICES

¶33

3 - NC: 2026:KHC:15016 WP No. 2566 of 2026 C/W WP No. 2249 of 2026

¶34

HC-KAR

¶35

VIDHANA SOUDHA, BENGALURU - 560001.

¶36

THE DIRECTOR

¶37

HEALTH AND FAMILY WELFARE SERVICES AROGYA SOUDHA MAGADI ROAD BENGALURU 560023.

¶38

THE DIRECTOR CUM DEAN GOVT NANDI MEDICAL COLLEGE AND THE DISTRICT SURGEON/MEDICAL SUPERINTENDENT CHIKKABALLAPUR GOVERNMENT HOSPITAL CHIKKABALLAPUR - 562101.

¶39

...RESPONDENTS

¶40

(BY SRI. ADITYA DIWAKARA, AGA)

¶41

THIS WRIT PETITION FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TODIRECT THE RESPONDENT NO. 3 TO CONSIDER THE ANNX-C DATED 01.09.2025 AND TO PASS APPROPRIATE ORDERS.

¶42

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

¶43

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM

¶44

ORAL ORDER

¶45

Captioned petitions are filed seeking a writ in the

¶46

nature of mandamus to direct respondents to consider petitioners' representations as they are willing to pay a membership fee of Rs.1,00,000/- each to be enrolled as

¶47

4 - NC: 2026:KHC:15016 WP No. 2566 of 2026 C/W WP No. 2249 of 2026

¶48

HC-KAR

¶49

members of Arogya Raksha Samithi as per clause 3(I)(a)

¶50

of the Rules and Regulations of the Society.

¶51

The grievance of the petitioners is that though they have submitted representations dated 01.09.2025 (Annexure–“C”) expressing their willingness to remit Rs.1,00,000/- each towards membership fee, the said representations have not been considered by the respondents, which has compelled them to approach this Court.

¶52

Learned Additional Government Advocate, on instructions, submits that though the notification is issued, the Samithi contemplated thereunder is yet to be constituted by the State. He submits that once the Samithi is constituted, the petitioners’ representations would be considered in accordance with law.

¶53

Recording the said submission, this Court proceeds to pass the following:

¶54

5 - NC: 2026:KHC:15016 WP No. 2566 of 2026 C/W WP No. 2249 of 2026

¶55

HC-KAR

¶56

ORDER

¶57

(i) Writ petitions are disposed of.

¶58

(ii) Respondent Nos.1 to 3 shall take steps to constitute the Samithi, if not already constituted.

¶59

(iii) Upon such constitution, the representations dated 01.09.2025 (Annexure–“C”) submitted by the petitioners shall be considered in accordance with law, including their request for enrolment as members on payment of Rs.1,00,000/- each.

¶60

Sd/(SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM) JUDGE

¶61

ALB List No.: 2 Sl No.: 4

Sri.Ananthakumar v. State of Karnataka

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sri.Ananthakumar v. State of Karnataka

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

Shri. Mohammed Khaleel Vs State of Karnataka

Mr Arti Panja Vs the State of Karnataka

Smt.Sunanda Vs State of Karnataka

The Manager Vs K Thimmaiah

M/S B H Gangadharachar Contractor Vs State of Karnataka

Renuka T M Vs the Senior Regional Manager