Allowed

Sree Veerapulakeshi Vidyavardhaka Samsthe v. the State of Karnataka

Karnataka HC9 Apr 2026WP/30720/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Writ petition challenging an endorsement refusing to approve lecturers' appointments on roster/reservation grounds. Holding that reservation to a single post is impermissible, the High Court quashed the endorsement and remitted the matter to the Director for Pre-University Education for fresh consideration.

What did the court decide?

Impugned endorsement (Annexure-M) quashed; matter remitted to respondent no.2 for fresh consideration in accordance with law.

Sree Veerapulakeshi Vidyavardhaka Samsthe Vs the… — Service and Employment | Karnataka HC (2026)

¶1

NC: 2026:KHC:19832 WP No. 30720 of 2024

¶2

¶3

HC-KAR

¶4

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶5

DATED THIS THE 9^TH DAY OF APRIL, 2026

¶6

BEFORE

¶7

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.R.KRISHNA KUMAR

¶8

WRIT PETITION NO. 30720 OF 2024 (S-RES)

¶9

BETWEEN:

¶10

SREE VEERAPULAKESHI VIDYAVARDHAKA SAMSTHE, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, BADAMI, BAGALKOT DISTRICT - 587 201, UNDER BOMBAY PUBLIC TRUST ACT.

¶11

SMT. DEEPA K HERAKAL W/O B.V. PATIL, AGED ABOUT 35 YEARS, WORKING AS LECTURER IN CHEMISTRY, SRI. G.M. KALYANASETTY PRE-UNIVERSITY COLLEGE, BADAMI, BAGALKOT DISTRICT - 587 201.

¶12

Digitally signed by SHARADAVANI B Location: High Court of Karnataka

¶13

HUSENA BASHA

¶14

S/O MUKTA SAB, AGED ABOUT 32 YEARS, WORKING AS LECTURER IN BIOLOGY, SRI. G.M. KALYANASETTY PRE-UNIVERSITY COLLEGE, BADAMI, BAGALKOT DISTRICT - 587 201.

¶15

…PETITIONERS

¶16

(BY SRI. PADMANABHA R, ADVOCATE)

¶17

¶18

NC: 2026:KHC:19832 WP No. 30720 of 2024

¶19

HC-KAR

¶20

AND:

¶21

THE STATE OF KARNATAKA REPRESENTED BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY DEPARTMENT OF PRIMARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION, M.S. BUILDING, SRI. AMBEEDKAR VEEDHI BENGALURU - 560 001.

¶22

THE DIRECTOR FOR PRE-UNIVERSITY EDUCATION 18^TH CROSS, SAMPIGE ROAD, MALLESHWARAM - 560 012.

¶23

…RESPONDENTS

¶24

(BY SRI. G. RAMESH NAIK, AGA FOR R1 AND R2)

¶25

THIS W.P. IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE IMPUGNED ENDORSEMENT BEARING NO. DPUE-EST30EB (LPA)/5/2023/-R AND G (E-1038714) DTD. 23.10.2024 VIDE ANNX-M ISSUED BY R2 AND ETC.,

¶26

THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:

¶27

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.R.KRISHNA KUMAR

¶28

ORAL ORDER

¶29

In this petition, petitioners seek the following reliefs -

¶30

"i) Issue a writ in the nature certiorari to quash the impugned endorsement bearing No.DPUE-EST30EB (LPA)/5/2023/-R AND G (E-1038714) dated

¶31

3 - NC: 2026:KHC:19832 WP No. 30720 of 2024

¶32

HC-KAR

¶33

23.10.2024 vide Annexure-M issued by Respondent no.2.

¶34

ii) Issue a writ in the nature of mandamus directing the respondent No.1 and 2 to approve the selection list dated 30.06.2023 by which the 2nd petitioner was selected and appointed as Lecturer in Chemistry vide Annexure-K and extend the benefit of salary grant.

¶35

iii) Issue a writ in the nature of mandamus directing the respondent No.1 and 2 to approve the selection list dated 30.06.2023 by which the 3rd petitioner was selected and appointed as Lecturer in Biology vide Annexure-L and extend the benefit of salary grant.

¶36

iv) Issue such other orders, directions as deemed fit in the circumstances of the case and allow this writ petition with exemplary."

¶37

Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and

¶38

learned counsel for the respondents and perused the material on record.

¶39

Learned counsel for the petitioners would reiterate the various contentions urged in the petition and invited my attention to the material on record including the impugned endorsement in order to point out that impugned endorsement purporting to apply reservation and roster to the post of a

¶40

4 - NC: 2026:KHC:19832 WP No. 30720 of 2024

¶41

HC-KAR

¶42

Lecturer in Chemistry and Lecturer in Biology, respectively, which are single posts, is contrary to law and as such, the impugned endorsement deserves to be set aside and the matter be remitted back to the respondents for consideration afresh in accordance with law. In support of his submission that reservation to a single post is impermissible in law, he has placed reliance upon following judgments -

¶43

i) State of Karnataka and Others v. K.Govindappa and Another, reported in (2009)1 Supreme Court Cases 1;

¶44

ii) R.R.Inamdar v. State of Karnataka and Others, reported in (2020)19 Supreme Court Cases 543;

¶45

iii) Tej Prakash Pathak and Others v. Rajasthan High Court and Others, reported in 2024 SCC OnLine SC 3184; and

¶46

iv) K. Manjusree v. State of Andhra Pradesh and Another, reported in (2008)3 Supreme Court Cases 512.

¶47

Per contra, learned A.G.A. would submit that there is no merit in the petition and same is liable to be dismissed.

¶48

5 - NC: 2026:KHC:19832 WP No. 30720 of 2024

¶49

HC-KAR

¶50

A perusal of the impugned endorsement would indicate that the respondents purported to reserve single post by way of reservation and roster, which is impermissible in law, as held by the Apex Court in the aforesaid judgments.

¶51

Under these circumstances, I deem it just and appropriate to set aside the impugned endorsement and remit the matter back to respondent no.2 for consideration afresh in accordance with law in the light of the aforesaid judgments.

¶52

In the result, the following :

¶53

ORDER

¶54

i. Petition is allowed.

¶55

ii. The Impugned endorsement issued by respondent no.2 vide Annexure-M is quashed.

¶56

iii. The matter is remitted back to respondent no.2 for re-consideration afresh bearing in mind the principles laid down in the aforesaid judgments.

¶57

(S.R.KRISHNA KUMAR) JUDGE

¶58

HNM List No.: 1 Sl No.: 0

Sree Veerapulakeshi Vidyavardhaka Samsthe v. the State of Karnataka

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sree Veerapulakeshi Vidyavardhaka Samsthe 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

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Govindappa P K Vs the State of Karnataka

Smt. Aishwarya Gowda Vs State of Karnataka

Mahesh Kotari Vs the State of Karnataka

Smt. v Rajalakshmi, Vs the State of Karnataka

S.C.S. Parents Association (R) Vs the State of Karnataka

Sri H L Shivanand Vs State of Karnataka