Ms. Abhignashree L Vs the State of Karnataka

¶1

1 - NC: 2026:KHC:9033-DB WP No.36279 of 2025

¶2

HC-KAR

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶4

DATED THIS THE 13^TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2026 PRESENT

¶5

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JAYANT BANERJI AND

¶6

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE T.M.NADAF WRIT PETITION NO. 36279 OF 2025 (EDN-RES)

¶7

BETWEEN:

¶8

MS.ABHIGNASHREE L D/O LOKESH. V AGED ABOUT 24 YEARS STUDENT OF 3^RD YEAR MBBS COURSE DR.B.R.AMBEDKAR MEDICAL COLLEGE K.G.HALLI, BENGALURU-560 045 R/AT NO.104, CHANDAN APRTS. ANNAPURANESHWARA NAGAR NAGARBHAVI, BENGALURU-560 091

¶9

…PETITIONER

¶10

(BY SMT.JAHNAVI MANJUNATH, ADVOCATE FOR SRI CHANDRAKANTH R GOULAY, ADVOCATE)

¶11

AND:

¶12

Digitally signed by K G RENUKAMBA Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

¶13

THE STATE OF KARNATAKA DEPARTMENT OF MEDICAL EDUCATION M.S.BUILDINGS, BENGALURU-560 001

¶14

NATIONAL MEDICAL COMMISSION (ERSTWHILE MEDICAL COUNCIL OF INDIA) POCKET 14, SECTOR 8 DWARKA, NEW DELHI-110 007 REP. BY ITS SECRETARY

¶15

THE DIRECTORATE OF MEDICAL EDUCATION REPRESENTED BY ITS DIRECTOR I FLOOR, FORT, K R ROAD BENGALURU-560 002

¶16

THE KARNATAKA EXAMINATIONS AUTHORITY SAMPIGE ROAD, 18^TH CROSS

¶17

2 - NC: 2026:KHC:9033-DB WP No.36279 of 2025

¶18

HC-KAR

¶19

MALLESHWARAM, BANGALORE-560 012 REP. BY ITS EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR

¶20

G.R.MEDICAL COLLEGE HOSPITAL AND RESEARCH CENTRE PADU, VIA PADUMALE, NEERUMARGA MANGALORE-575 029 REP.BY DEAN & DIRECTOR SRI GANESH RAO

¶21

G R EDUCATION TRUST NEERMARGA, NEER MARGA MANGALORE -575 029 REP. ITS AUTHORISED OFFICER

¶22

THE CHAIRMAN FEE REGULATORY COMMITTEE KARNATAKA EXAMINATIONS AUTHORITY SAMPIGE ROAD, 18^TH CROSS MALLESHWARAM, BANGALORE – 560 012

¶23

…RESPONDENTS

¶24

(BY SMT.MAMATHA SHETTY, AGA FOR R1; SRI N.K.RAMESH, ADVOCATE FOR R4 & R7, SRI VIKRAM UNNI RAJGOPAL, ADVOCATE FOR R5 & R6; R2 & R3 SERVED & UNREPRESENTED)

¶25

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO (A) ISSUE A WRIT OF MANDAMUS DIRECTING THE 5^TH RESPONDENT TO REFUND THE UNLAWFUL EXCESS AMOUNT COLLECTED FROM THE PETITIONER TOTALLING RS.25,03,950/- (ANNEXURE-A) WITH INTEREST AT 12% P.A. ETC.

¶26

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

¶27

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JAYANT BANERJI and HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE T.M.NADAF

¶28

3 - NC: 2026:KHC:9033-DB WP No.36279 of 2025

¶29

HC-KAR

¶30

ORAL ORDER

¶31

(PER: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JAYANT BANERJI)

¶32

This petition has been filed seeking the following reliefs:

¶33

(a) Issue a writ of mandamus directing the 5^th Respondent to refund the unlawful excess amount collected from the petitioner totalling Rs.25,03,950/- (Annexure-A) with interest at 12 percent per annum;

¶34

(b) Issue a direction to the Respondents-1 to 4 to ensure, facilitate to refund from the 5th Respondent, in light of similar common judgment dated 11/08/2025 passed by this Hon’ble Court in W.P.No.10871/2024 and other connected cases;

¶35

(c) Issue a writ of mandamus in the nature of directing the Fee Regulation Committee to decide FRC No.8/2025 as early as possible;

¶36

(d) Pass such other order or reliefs as this Hon’ble Court may deem fit, including costs of the petition.

¶37

4 - NC: 2026:KHC:9033-DB WP No.36279 of 2025

¶38

HC-KAR

¶39

It is submitted by learned Counsel for the petitioner

¶40

that for the very same relief sought in prayer No.(a) an application has been made to the Fee Regulatory Committee constituted under Section 6 of the Karnataka Professional Education Institutions (Regulation of Admission and Determination of Fee) Act, 2006.

¶41

Sri N.K.Ramesh, learned Counsel appearing for the Committee states that the matter is pending consideration before the Committee. Learned Counsel for respondent No.6/Trust, also states that the cross examination of the petitioner has taken place in part before the Fee Regulatory Committee.

¶42

In view of the aforesaid, we find no reason to interfere in this petition as the petitioner is already availing the statutory remedy provided under the aforesaid Act of 2006. For the reason aforesaid, this petition is dismissed.

¶43

Though the learned Counsel for the petitioner prays for direction for early disposal of the case, however, nothing has been demonstrated by the learned Counsel for the

¶44