Sri. Mahaboob Basha.T Vs State of Karnataka — Writ and Judicial Review | Karnataka HC (2026)

Sri. Mahaboob Basha.T Vs State of Karnataka — Writ and Judicial Review | Karnataka HC (2026)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Endorsement dated 16.04.2021 (Annexure-M) quashed; matter remitted to respondent No.2 - Director, Directorate of Minorities - to reconsider the petitioner's case after affording sufficient opportunity and pass appropriate order within sixty days from receipt of certified copy of the order.

Issue for consideration

Under Clause 10 of the Non-eligibility Conditions (income exceeding Rs.15,00,000/- per annum), which year's income is to be taken into consideration in determining eligibility for the National Overseas Scholarship, and was the denial of the petitioner's scholarship on that basis justified? +1 more

Court's answer

The Non-eligibility Condition disqualifying candidates whose income exceeds Rs.15,00,000/- per annum does not specify which year's income is to be considered, leaving the eligibility test ambiguous.

Ratio / Principle

In view of the ambiguity arising from the respondent authorities' reliance on Form-16 for the year 2019-20, the Court directed respondent No.2 (Director, Directorate of Minorities) to reconsider the petitioner's case after affording sufficient opportunity and to pass an appropriate order.

Key takeaways

On the corresponding income tax returns for the year 2019-20 the petitioner's income was Rs.14,75,602/-, below the ceiling, so he appeared eligible for the scholarship; conclusive determination was, however, left to respondent No.2.obiter¶45

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

High Court of Karnataka at Bengaluru (M.G.S. Kamal J), Oral Order dated 18-06-2026, WP No. 26705 of 2023 (GM-RES) [NC: 2026:KHC:30059]. The petitioner, short-listed for the National Overseas Scholarship for minority community students (2019-20) with an entitlement of Rs.10,00,000/-, was denied the scholarship by endorsement dated 16.04.2021 (Annexure-M) on the ground that his annual income exceeded Rs.15,00,000/-, based on the employer's Form-16 showing Rs.15,70,524/-. Finding Clause 10 of the Non-eligibility Conditions ('Exceeding Income Limit of 15 Lakhs per annum') ambiguous as to which year's income applies, and noting the corresponding income tax returns for 2019-20 showed Rs.14,75,602/-, the Court partly allowed the petition, quashed the endorsement and remitted the matter to respondent No.2 (Director, Directorate of Minorities) to reconsider the case after affording sufficient opportunity, within sixty days of receipt of the certified copy. The prayer to declare the Scheme unconstitutional and violative of Articles 14, 21 and 21-A was not adjudicated.

1 -

NC: 2026:KHC:30059 WP No. 26705 of 2023

HC-KAR

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

DATED THIS THE 18^TH DAY OF JUNE, 2026

BEFORE

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.G.S. KAMAL WRIT PETITION NO. 26705 OF 2023 (GM-RES)

BETWEEN:

SRI. MAHABOOB BASHA.T S/O. MOHAMED TAHIR BASHA. C, AGED ABOUT 28 YEARS, REPRESENTED BY HIS ATTORNEY HOLDER, MOHAMMAD TAHIR BASHA, MAJOR, R/AT NO. 330-2, NEAR KOHINOOR AUTO STAND, CHELGUDDA, CHITRADURGA-577 501.

…PETITIONER

(BY SRI. G LAKSHMEESH RAO.,ADVOCATE)

AND:

Digitally signed by SUMA B N Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

STATE OF KARNATAKA REP. BY ITS SECRETARY, MINORITY WELFARE DEPARTMENT, VIDHANA SOUDHA, BENGALURU-560 001.

THE DIRECTOR DIRECTORATE OF MINORITIES, 20 AND 21^ST FLOOR, V.V. TOWERS, DR. B. R. AMBEDKAR ROAD, BENGALURU-560 001.

…RESPONDENTS

(BY SRI. .,ADVOCATE)

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO QUASH THE ENDORSEMENT ISSUED BY THE R2 DATED 16.04.2021 VIDE REFERENCE NO.AASAM.NI/MAA HA/CR-03/2021-22 AS PER ANNEXURE-M AS TO DENIAL OF SCHOLARSHIP TO THE

2 -

NC: 2026:KHC:30059 WP No. 26705 of 2023

HC-KAR

PETITIONERWRIT TO THE RESPONDENTS TO RELEASE THE NATIONAL OVERSEAS SCHOLARSHIP AMOUNT OF THE CURRENT YEARS 2019-20 AND 2020-21 I.E., 20 LAKHS I.E., RS.10 LAKHS PER YEAR IN FAVOUR OF THE PETITIONERDECLARE THAT THE SCHEME OF THE NATIONAL OVERSEAS SCHOLARSHIP FOR MINORITY COMMUNITY STUDENTS IS UNCONSTITUTIONAL AND VIOLATIVE OF ARTICLE 14, 21 AND 21-A OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA.

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

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.G.S. KAMAL

ORAL ORDER

Petitioner being desirous pursuing his studies abroad in Master's degree, PhD (Doctor of Philosophy) and Post-Doctoral Fellowship (PDF Courses) etc., in the foreign universities for the year 2019-20 had applied for scholarship as per notification at Annexure-C.

2. Clause 10 of the Non-eligibility Conditions contained in the said notification at Annexure-C reads as follows:

'' Non-eligibility Condition :-

9. XXXX

10. Exceeding Income Limit of 15 Lakhs per annum.''

3. Petitioner filed an application for the scholarship on 16.07.2019, proceedings were conducted and his name was short-listed at Sl.No.30 as seen at Annexure-E holding him to

3 - NC: 2026:KHC:30059 WP No. 26705 of 2023

HC-KAR

be eligible for scholarship of Rs.10,00,000/-. However, subsequently by the impugned endorsement at Annexure-M dated 14.04.2021, his request was declined, on the premise of his annual income having exceeded Rs.15,00,000/-, inasmuch as his income tax returns indicated he having income of Rs.15,70,524/- per annum for the financial year 2019-20.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the income of the petitioner ought to have been taken into consideration for the year during which the petitioner had sought for grant of scholarship, which is 2019-20. The income tax returns in Form No.16 relied upon by the respondentauthorities is for the financial assessment year 2018-19 i.e, for the previous year, commencing from 01.04.2018 to ending on 31.03.2019. She refers to income tax returns of the petitioner for the assessment year 2020-21, concerning the year 201920, wherein the income of the petitioner is shown as Rs.4,82,630/-. Referring to these two income tax returns, she submits that respondent-authorities have erred in taking into consideration the income tax returns of the petitioner for the financial year 2019-20, which is not the intent and purport of

4 - NC: 2026:KHC:30059 WP No. 26705 of 2023

HC-KAR

the scheme. She further submits that the reliance placed on by the respondent-State onto the Form No.16 is also misconceived and inasmuch as the said form was submitted by the employer of the petitioner whereas the income tax returns filed by the petitioner for the relevant year indicate his income being Rs.13,96,590/- as per Annexure-H, which is below the condition imposed in the notification. She submits that in any event the interpretation has to be given to benefit the candidates like that of the petitioner who are otherwise eligible to have the scholarship.

5. Learned AGA referring to the Non-eligibility Conditions and the date of application referred to above submits that since the course was to commence mid-academic year 2019-20, it is income of previous year alone has to be considered, which according to income tax returns of the petitioner exceeded the limit of Rs.15,00,000/-.

6. Heard and perused the records.

7. The Non-eligibility conditions as noted hereinabove though mentioned ineligibility of candidate having income

5 - NC: 2026:KHC:30059 WP No. 26705 of 2023

HC-KAR

exceeding Rs.15,00,000/- per annum, it is not clear as to which year the said income has to be taken into consideration.

8. The respondent-State has relied upon the information provided by the employer of the petitioner in Form-16 for the year 2019-20, where the income of the petitioner is shown as Rs.15,70,524/- per annum, which according to the petitioner is erroneous. The corresponding income tax returns for the year 2019-20 indicate the petitioner having income of Rs.14,75,602/-. Thus, the petitioner seems to be eligible for the benefit of the scholarship.

9. However, there being an ambiguity in respondentAuthorities relying upon the Form-16 for the year 2019-20, this Court deems it appropriate to direct the respondent No.2-the Director, Directorate of Minorities to reconsider the case of the petitioner after affording sufficient opportunity to the petitioner and pass appropriate order.

10. Accordingly, following;

6 -

NC: 2026:KHC:30059 WP No. 26705 of 2023

HC-KAR

ORDER

(i) Petition is partly allowed .

(ii) Endorsement dated 16.04.2021 as per Annexure-M is hereby quashed.

(iii) Matter is remitted to respondent No.2-the Director, Directorate of Minorities to consider the case of the petitioner as directed above within a period of sixty days from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order.

SD/(M.G.S. KAMAL) JUDGE

RL

List No.: 1 Sl No.: 27