G v K Education Trust Vs State of Karnataka

G V K EDUCATION TRUST ARISE AWAKE PUBLIC SCHOOL, AGED ABOUT 64 YEARS, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, SRI GIRISHA H.N., S/O. LATE H.P. NINGAPPA, PLOT NO.2, 1^ST CROSS, NEAR GANAPATHY TEMPLE, TELECOM LAYOUT, SUNKADAKATTE, PIPE LINE ROAD, VISHWANEEDAM POST, BENGALURU-560 091.

¶12

…PETITIONER

¶13

(BY SRI. NARASIMHARAJU., ADVOCATE)

¶14

AND:

¶15

STATE OF KARNATAKA

¶16

REPRESENTED BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF SCHOOL EDUCATION AND LITERACY (HIGH SCHOOL),

¶17

2 -

¶18

NC: 2026:KHC:2600 WP No. 5239 of 2025

HC-KAR

M.S. BUILDING,

BENGALURU-560001.

DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC INSTRUCTION

¶23

(D.D.P.I.), BENGALURU NORTH (ADMIN.), BENGALURU-560002.

¶24

THE BLOCK EDUCATION OFFICER (B.E.O.), BENGALURU NORTH ZONE-I, BENGALURU-560002.

¶25

…RESPONDENTS

¶26

(BY SRI. MANJUNATH K., HCGP FOR R1 TO R3)

¶27

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE ENDORSEMENT DTD. 03.02.2025 VIDE BEARING NO. ANU-1/PRA.SHI.A/KHA.SHA.ANADHIKRUTHA /STALANTARA /27/2024-25 ISSUED BY THE R-2 AS PER ANXN-A. QUASH THE FINAL NOTICE DTD. 05.08.2024 ISSUED BY THE R-3 VIDE BEARING NO. C10 KHA.SCHOOL.01/2024-25 AS PER ANNX-B. CONSEQUENTLY, DIRECT THE R-2 TO ISSUE SHIFTING ORDER TO THE PETITIONERS TRUST AS PER THE REPRESENTATION DTD. 13.12.2024 AS PER ANNX-Q.

¶28

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

¶29

3 -

¶30

NC: 2026:KHC:2600 WP No. 5239 of 2025

¶31

HC-KAR

¶32

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

¶33

ORAL ORDER

¶34

The petitioner filed this writ petition challenging the endorsement dated 03.02.2025 issued by second respondent vide Annexure-A, and a final notice dated 05.08.2024 issued by the third respondent vide Annexure-B, and sought a mandamus directing the respondent No.2 to issue shifting order to the petitioner trust as per the representation dated 13.12.2024 as per Annexure-Q.

¶35

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

¶36

The petitioner trust was registered and accorded permission to run the school for Class 1^st to 5^th standard in Kannada Medium on 14.12.2017. The permission was accorded to change of medium from Kannada to English by the Government. Respondent No.3 has conducted an inspection and found that the

¶37

4 - NC: 2026:KHC:2600 WP No. 5239 of 2025

¶38

HC-KAR

¶39

building/school has no basic necessities to run the school. One Mr. Naveen G had made a request to the president of the trust to find an alternative place to run the school and also requested to hand over the building which belongs to him. The petitioner’s trust made a request to respondent No.3 seeking permission to shift the school from earlier place to the new building before the academic year started for 2024-2025. The petitioner also made a request to respondent No.3 to accord permission to shift the school for providing better education. Respondent No.3 issued a show cause notice contending that, why the action should not be taken in pursuance of Section 123 of the Karnataka Education Act.

¶40

The petitioner made a request to the third respondent to accord permission to shift the school. Respondent No.2 issued a final notice with a direction to close the school. On 13.12.2024, the petitioner physically submitted an application with a checklist in

¶41

5 - NC: 2026:KHC:2600 WP No. 5239 of 2025

¶42

HC-KAR

¶43

the proper format before the second respondent as per the direction of this court. The second respondent issued an impugned endorsement dated 03.02.2025 with a direction to close the school. Hence, this writ petition.

¶44

Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and learned High Court Government Pleader.

¶45

Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the impugned endorsement issued by the second respondent is not in compliance with Rule 9 of Karnataka Educational Institutions (Classification, Regulation And Prescription Of Curricula Rules, 1995). He submits that before issuing an impugned endorsement, no opportunity was provided to the petitioner to put forth his case. Hence, the impugned endorsement passed by the respondent No.2 is arbitrary, erroneous and contrary to the provisions of the Rules of 1995. Hence, on these grounds, he pray to allow the writ petition.

¶46

6 - NC: 2026:KHC:2600 WP No. 5239 of 2025

¶47

HC-KAR

¶48

Per contra , learned High Court Government pleader

¶49

submits that respondent Nos.2 and 3 have not considered the relevant provisions of the Rules of 2017. If reasonable opportunity is granted, respondent Nos.2 and 3 will reconsider and would pass the appropriate order in accordance with the provisions of Rules 2017.

¶50

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

¶51

It is an undisputed fact that the petitioner trust school is registered, and a permission was obtained to run the school from class 1^st to class 5^th standard in Kannada medium and thereafter accorded a permission to change the school from Kannada medium to English medium. The concerned department permitted to change the medium of school from Kannada to English vide order dated 29.03.2019. Respondent No.3 has conducted an inspection on 1.02.2024, wherein the third

¶52

7 - NC: 2026:KHC:2600 WP No. 5239 of 2025

¶53

HC-KAR

¶54

respondent found that there is no basic facilities are provided by the petitioner trust to run the school.

¶55

Further, the petitioner trust has made a request to the third respondent to shift the school from the existing place to new building. The third Respondent declined to grant permission to shift the existing school to the new building. Thereafter, based on the inspection report, the third respondent issued a show cause notice contending that why an action should not be taken against the petitioner's trust in pursuance of Section 123 of Act. The petitioner replied to the show cause notice requesting to accord permission to shift the school. Respondents without considering the same, issued an endorsement and final notice directing the petitioner to close the school.

¶56

From the perusal of the impugned endorsement, vide Annexure-A, it is evident that the second respondent did not consider the stand taken by the petitioner in

¶57

8 - NC: 2026:KHC:2600 WP No. 5239 of 2025

¶58

HC-KAR

¶59

the reply to the show cause notice and no opportunity is provided. Admittedly, the petitioner's school started in 2014, meanwhile, the State Government has brought an amendment to the Karnataka Educational Institutions (Classification, Regulation And Prescription Of Curricula Rules, 1995), 08.03.2018 amending Rule 2 and Rule 5.

¶60

Amended Rule 5(4) which reads as follows:

¶61

4. Amendment of Rule 5 :- In Rule 5 of the said

¶62

rules.-

¶63

(i) in sub-rule (1), in clause (ii), for the words “six square feet”, the words “one square meter” shall be substituted;

¶64

(ii) after sub-rule (3), the following shall be inserted, namely.-

¶65

“(4) Every private body of persons desiring to establish and maintain an educational institution imparting pre-primary, primary, secondary and higher secondary education or any part thereof shall own or have on lease for a minimum period of thirty years following minimum contiguous extent of land for the building and playground of the educational institution

¶66

9 - NC: 2026:KHC:2600 WP No. 5239 of 2025

¶67

HC-KAR

¶68

with permission from relevant authorities to use for educational purposes:

¶69

Sl.No.	Location	Extent of Land
I. Edu second orpre-	cational institution imparting pre ary education, or primary to higher primaryto secondaryeducation	- primary to higher secondary education,
1	BBMP and Other Municipal Corporation Areas	2000 square meter
2	Other areas	4000 square meter
II. Ed second second	ucational institution imparting onl ary education, or imparting se ary education.	y either primary and condary and higher
3	BBMP and Other Municipal Corporation Areas	1500 square meter
4	Other areas	3000 square meter
III. Ed second 5	ucational institution imparting only ary education, or higher secondary BBMP and Other Municipal Corporation Areas	primary education, or education 1000 square meter
6	Other areas	2000 square meter
IV. Ed 7	ucational institution imparting only p All areas	re-primary education Building carpet area of 1 square meter per student subject to a minimum of 2000 sq.ft.

¶70

10 -

¶71

NC: 2026:KHC:2600 WP No. 5239 of 2025

¶72

HC-KAR

¶73

preferably in the ground floor:

¶74

Provided that, the above land requirement shall not be applicable to the educational institutions imparting preprimary education only:

¶75

Provided further that, the above requirement of land extent shall not be applicable to the existing educational institutions started with due registration up to academic year 2017-18 except the extent of land prescribed in the Right of Children to Free and Compulsory Education Act, 2009 (Act No.35 of 2009)."

¶76

The said amended Rules is prospective in nature wherein the respondent Nos.2 and 3 did not comply with the said Rules regarding the petitioner trust. The said amendment is not retrospective in nature. Without considering the said aspect, respondent Nos.2 and 3 have passed endorsement at AnnexureA and a final notice vide Annexure B.

¶77

The impugned endorsement and final notice passed by respondent Nos.2 and 3 requires reconsideration. Whether the amended provisions of the Rules 2017 are applicable prospective or retrospective? Without

¶78

11 -

¶79

NC: 2026:KHC:2600 WP No. 5239 of 2025

¶80

HC-KAR

¶81

considering the same, they have passed the impugned endorsement and final notice. Hence, in view of the above discussion, I proceed to pass the following order:

¶82

ORDER

¶83

i. The writ petition is allowed .

¶84

ii. The impugned endorsement dated 03.02.2025 vide Annexure-A and final notice dated 05.08.2024 vide Annexure-B are hereby quashed.

¶85

iii. Respondent No.2 is directed to reconsider and pass appropriate order in accordance with law within 8 weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

¶86

iv. Respondent No.2 is also directed to hear the impleading applicant and provide an opportunity of personal hearing to the petitioner trust and also the impleading applicant and thereafter pass the appropriate order in accordance with law.

¶87

NC: 2026:KHC:2600 WP No. 5239 of 2025

¶88

12 -

¶89

HC-KAR

¶90

v. Pending interlocutory application/s, if any, shall stand disposed of accordingly.

¶91

Sd/(ASHOK S.KINAGI) JUDGE

¶92

SKS

G v. K Education Trust v State of Karnataka

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

G v. K Education Trust v State of Karnataka

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

Mr. Shams Tabrez Vs Shriram Finance Limited

Sri Balu Vikram R Vs Union Bank of India

Society for Women Development Vs State of Karnataka

Little Flower College of Nursing Vs State of Karnataka

Smt Sunitha B Vs State of Karnataka

Kalpatharu School of Nursing Vs Karnataka State Diploma in Nursing Examination Board