Allowed¶59

Dakshina Bharat Hindi Prachar Sabha v. Union of India

Education law – NCTE recognition

Karnataka HC8 Jul 2026WP/27783/2025

Download

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Keywords: NCTE recognition withdrawal; excess admissions 2013-2017; B.Ed college Mysore; Dakshina Bharat Hindi Prachar Sabha; DBHPS Basaveshwara College of Education; NCTE Appellate Authority appeal dismissed; South Regional Committee order quashed; certiorari; Article 226; Writ Petition (EDN-RES) WP No. 27783 of 2025; Co-ordinate Bench WP No. 106232 of 2025; Karnataka High Court, Justice Ashok S. Kinagi, order dated 08.07.2026.

What did the court decide?

Writ petition allowed; Annexure-H (Respondent No.3's order dated 02.06.2025 withdrawing recognition) and Annexure-L (Respondent No.2's order dated 18.08.2025 dismissing the appeal) quashed; I.A.No.1/2025 disposed of accordingly. ¶59

Dakshina Bharat Hindi Prachar Sabha Vs Union of… — Writ and Judicial Review | Karnataka HC (2026)

¶1

NC: 2026:KHC:34838 WP No. 27783 of 2025

¶2

¶3

HC-KAR

¶4

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶5

DATED THIS THE 8^TH DAY OF JULY, 2026

¶6

BEFORE

¶7

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK S.KINAGI WRIT PETITION NO. 27783 OF 2025 (EDN-RES)

¶8

BETWEEN:

¶9

DAKSHINA BHARAT HINDI

¶10

PRACHAR SABHA, POST BOX NO.42, D.C.COMPOUND, DHARWAD - 580 001. REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY. REG. UNDER SOCIETIES ACT, 1860.

¶11

Digitally signed by SHILPABAI S Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

¶12

DBHPS BASAVESHWARA COLLEGE OF EDUCATION, 'HINDI BHAVAN', V.V.ROAD, K R MOHALLA, MYSORE - 570 004. REPRESENTED BY ITS PRINCIPAL.

¶13

…PETITIONERS

¶14

(BY SRI. HIREMATH MALLIKARJUNASWAMY BASAYYA., ADVOCATE)

¶15

AND:

¶16

UNION OF INDIA, MINISTRY OF EDUCATION, DEPARTMENT OF SCHOOL EDUCATION AND LITERACY, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, NO.87, PARLIAMENT HOUSE,

¶17

2 - NC: 2026:KHC:34838 WP No. 27783 of 2025

¶18

HC-KAR

¶19

PARLIAMENT STREET, NEW DELHI - 110 001.

¶20

NCTE APPELLATE AUTHORITY, G-7, SECTOR -10 (NEAR SECTOR -10 METRO STATION DWARKA, NEW DELHI - 110 075, BY ITS DEPUTY SECRETARY (APPEAL).

¶21

NATIONAL COUNCIL FOR TEACHER EDUCATION, SOUTH REGIONAL COMMITTEE, G-7 SECTOR-10 (NEAR SECTOR -10 METRO STATION DWARKA, NEW DELHI - 110 075, REPRESENTED BY ITS REGIONAL DIRECTOR.

¶22

…RESPONDENTS

¶23

(BY SRI.B.S.VENKATANARAYANA., CGC FOR R1; SRI.VINOD KUMAR, ADVOCATE FOR R2 AND R3)

¶24

THIS W.P. IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE ORDER DATED 02.06.2025 PASSED BY R-3 BEARING NO. F.SRC/NCTE/AOSO0602.APSS00538/B.ED/461STMTG./KA/2025 /148272 WHICH IS PRODUCED AT ANNX-H AND ETC.,

¶25

THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY,

¶26

ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:

¶27

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

¶28

¶29

NC: 2026:KHC:34838 WP No. 27783 of 2025

¶30

HC-KAR

¶31

ORAL ORDER

¶32

The petitioners filed this petition seeking the following reliefs:

¶33

a) Issue a writ of certiorari quashing the order dated 02.06.2025 passed by 3^rd respondent bearing No. F.SRC/NCTE/AOSO0602.APSS00538/B.Ed/461^st Mtg./KA/2025/148272 which is produced at Annexure-H and;

¶34

b) Issue a writ of certiorari quashing the order dated 18.08.2025 passed by respondent No.2 in appeal bearing No.APPL SRC 202515177/E-87631 produced at Annexure-L and consequently allow the said appeal;

¶35

c) Issue such other writ or directions as deemed fit in the interest of justice and equity.

¶36

Brief facts leading rise to the filing of this petition are as follows:

¶37

This writ petition is filed challenging the order dated 02.06.2025 passed by respondent No.3 vide Annexure-H, and the order dated 18.08.2025 passed by respondent No.2 – National Council for Teacher

¶38

4 - NC: 2026:KHC:34838 WP No. 27783 of 2025

¶39

HC-KAR

¶40

Education Appellate Authority vide Annexure-L. In terms of the order at Annexure-H, the recognition given to the petitioner's Institution has been withdrawn. The petitioner filed an appeal before respondent No.2 Appellate authority, and the said appeal came to be dismissed vide order dated 18.08.2025.

¶41

It is noticed from the impugned order that the recognition has been withdrawn on the premise that, in 2013-2017, excess admissions were given to the students by the then management committee of the institution. Except for this finding, there are no other findings relating to any violations of the terms and conditions of the recognition granted to the petitioner’s institution.

¶42

Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned counsel for the respondent.

¶43

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the impugned orders were passed only on the ground that

¶44

5 - NC: 2026:KHC:34838 WP No. 27783 of 2025

¶45

HC-KAR

¶46

the petitioner institution has admitted excess students and there is no finding recorded in the impugned orders in regard to the violation of any terms and conditions of the recognition. He also submits that a similar order was passed against the petitioner’s institution for the academic year 2008. The said order was set aside by the Co-ordinate Bench of this Court in WP No. 106232 of 2015. Hence, on these grounds, prays to allow the writ petition.

¶47

Per contra , leaned counsel of respondents No.2 and 3 submits that the authority was justified in withdrawing the recognition on the ground that the petitioner institution admitted excess students. Thus, it amounts to violation of admission norms for the year 2013 to 2017. Hence, on these grounds, prays to dismiss the writ petition.

¶48

Perused the records, and considered the submissions of the learning counsel for the parties.

¶49

6 - NC: 2026:KHC:34838 WP No. 27783 of 2025

¶50

HC-KAR

¶51

It is an undisputed fact that the petitioner institution is running educational institution and imparting education to the students. The petitioner had admitted the students in their institution. Respondents No.2 and 3 have issued an impugned order alleging that the petitioner's institution has admitted excess students. From the perusal of the impugned order, it does not disclose that the petitioner institution has violated the terms and conditions of the recognition granted to the petitioner's institution.

¶52

On the earlier occasion, a similar order was passed against the petitioner's institution for the academic year 2008 and 2009. The petitioner's institution challenged the similar order before the Dharwad bench in WP No. 106232 of 2025. The said writ petition came to be allowed vide order dated 17.10.2025 and the similar order was quashed by the Co-ordinate Bench in respect of the petitioner’s institution. Hence, the impugned orders are liable to be quashed.

¶53

¶54

NC: 2026:KHC:34838 WP No. 27783 of 2025

¶55

HC-KAR

¶56