Disposed¶42

Smt J Manjula v. State of Karnataka by

Karnataka HC15 Apr 2026WP/32831/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

WP No. 32831 of 2024 (S-RES), Smt. J. Manjula v. State of Karnataka & Others, High Court of Karnataka, decided 15.04.2026 by S.R. Krishna Kumar, J. Mandamus sought to direct respondent No. 5 to consider representation dated 10.10.2024 (Annexure-E); learned AGA produced endorsement dated 24.10.2024 rejecting the representation; petition disposed of with liberty to challenge the endorsement. Keywords: Articles 226/227, mandamus, non-consideration of representation, endorsement, disposed with liberty.

What did the court decide?

No mandamus issued; liberty reserved to the petitioner to take recourse to such remedies as available in law, including approaching this Court by challenging the endorsement dated 24.10.2024 rejecting the representation dated 10.10.2024. ¶42

Smt J Manjula Vs State of Karnataka by — Writ and Judicial Review | Karnataka HC (2026)

¶1

¶2

NC: 2026:KHC:20398 WP No. 32831 of 2024

¶3

HC-KAR

¶4

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 15^TH DAY OF APRIL, 2026

¶5

BEFORE

¶6

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

¶7

WRIT PETITION NO. 32831 OF 2024 (S-RES)

¶8

BETWEEN:

¶9

SMT J. MANJULA, W/O LATE LAKSHMINARAYANA, AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS, RESIDING AT VINAYAKANAGARA, PAVAGADA TOWN, PAVAGADA TALUK, TUMKUR DISTRICT, PIN – 572 116.

¶10

…PETITIONER

¶11

(BY SRI. LAKSHMIKANTH K., ADVOCATE)

¶12

AND:

¶13

Digitally signed by CHANDANA B M Location: High Court of Karnataka

¶14

STATE OF KARNATAKA BY IT'S SECRETARY DEPARTMENT OF PRIMARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION, M.S BUILDING. BANGALORE, PIN – 560 001.

¶15

THE COMMISSIONER, EDUCATION DEPARTMENT, NRUPATUNGA ROAD, BANGALORE, PIN – 560 001.

¶16

THE DIRECTOR FOR PUBLIC INSTRUCTIONS DEPARTMENT OF PRIMARY EDUCATION, OFFICE AT COMMISSIONER FOR PUBLIC INSTRUCTION, NRUPATHUNGA ROAD, BANGALORE – 560 001.

¶17

2 - NC: 2026:KHC:20398 WP No. 32831 of 2024

¶18

HC-KAR

¶19

THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR FOR PUBLIC INSTRUCTION TUMKUR NORTH DISTRICT, MADHUGIRI, PIN – 572 132.

¶20

THE BLOCK EDUCATION OFFICER PAVAGADA TALUK, PAVAGADA, TUMKUR DISTRICT, PIN – 561 202.

¶21

KARTHIK S/O PADMAVATHI, AGED ABOUT 34 YEARS, R/AT SHESHAVALA BUILDING, BANGLE SHOP, KOTAPETA, NEAR GANDHI SQUARE, DHON TOWN, DHON MANDAL, KURNOOL DISTRICT, ANDRA PRADESH, PIN – 518 001.

¶22

…RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. G. RAMESH NAIK, AGA FOR R1 TO R5; VIDE ORDER DATED 15.04.2026 NOTICE TO R6 IS HELD SUFFICIENT)

¶23

THIS W.P. IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO DIRECT THE R-5 TO CONSIDER THE REPRESENTATION DTD. 10.10.2024 PRODUCED AT ANNX-E.

¶24

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

¶25

¶26

NC: 2026:KHC:20398 WP No. 32831 of 2024

¶27

HC-KAR

¶28

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

¶29

ORAL ORDER

¶30

In this petition, the petitioner seeks the following reliefs:

¶31

“A) Issue a writ in the nature of mandamus or any other appropriate writ directing the 5^th respondent to consider the representation dated 10.10.2024 produced at Annexure-E.

¶32

B) To grant such other and further relief’s as this Hon’ble Court may deem it fit in the circumstances of the case in the interest of equity.”

¶33

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned AGA for respondent Nos.1 to 5 and perused the material on record.

¶34

It is the grievance of the petitioner that his representation dated 10.10.2024 at Annexure-E submitted to the respondents has not been considered so far by them nor any order has been passed on the same. Under these circumstances, the petitioner is before this Court by way of the present petition.

¶35

Learned AGA has filed a memo along with a copy of the endorsement dated 24.10.2024, whereby the aforesaid representation submitted by the petitioner at Annexure-E dated

¶36

¶37

NC: 2026:KHC:20398 WP No. 32831 of 2024

¶38

HC-KAR

¶39

10.10.2024 has been rejected by the concerned respondents. The

¶40

said memo and endorsement are placed on record.

¶41

In view of the aforesaid facts and circumstances, the

¶42

petition stands disposed of by reserving liberty in favour of the petitioner to take recourse to such remedies as available in law, including approaching this Court by challenging the aforesaid

¶43

endorsement, in accordance with law.

¶44

Sd/(S.R.KRISHNA KUMAR) JUDGE

¶45

BMC List No.: 1 Sl No.: 33

Smt J Manjula v. State of Karnataka by

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Smt J Manjula v. State of Karnataka by

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

Tejeswini G S Vs Reserve Bank of India

Mrs. Madhuri S Kotagi Vs the State of Karnataka

Smt Ramya H N Vs State of Karnataka

Smt Hema N Vs State of Karnataka

C S Mukunda Chandra Vs State of Karnataka

Sri. P. Mahesh Vs the State of Karnataka