- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:19260 WP No. 15250 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 6TH DAY OF JUNE, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE B M SHYAM PRASAD WRIT PETITION NO. 15250 OF 2025 (EDN-RES) BETWEEN: NIRMALA GANGA EDUCATION TRUST (R) MAIN ROAD KORATAGERE, TUMKUR DISTRICT 572129, REPRESENTED BY SMT. NIRMALA H A EXECUTIVE TRUSTEE OF NIRMALA GANGA EDUCATION TRUST (R), AGED BOUT 45 YEARS R/O KORATAGERE, TUMKUR DISTRICT 572129 …PETITIONER (BY SRI. RAJU BHAT.,ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA DEPARTMENT OF SCHOOL EDUCATION AND LITERACY MS BUILDING 6TH FLORO DR. AMBEDKAR STREET BANGALORE 01, BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY. 2. THE DIRECTOR, DEPARTMENT OF SCHOOL EDUCATION (PRE-UNIVERSITY) 18TH CROSS MALLESHWARAM, BENGALURU 560012. 3. THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR DEAPRTMENT OF SCHOOL EDUCATION Digitally signed by VANAMALA N Location: High Court of Karnataka - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:19260 WP No. 15250 of 2025 (PRE-UNIVERSITY) TUMKUUR DISTRICT 572101. …RESPONDENTS (BY SMT.B.P. RADHA., AGA) THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE ORDER DATED 9.05.2025 PASSED BY THE R-2 IN 1393900 DPUE-EST30UU (OTH) /10/2024-R AND G IN WITHDRAWING THE RECOGNITION GRANTED TO THE PETITIONER TO RUN A PUC A DIGITALLY SIGNED COPY OF THE ORDER IS HEREBY PRODUCED AS ANNX-A; CONSEQUENTLY RESTORE THE RECOGNITION GRANTED TO PETITIONER MANAGEMENT TO RUN PUC. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE B M SHYAM PRASAD ORAL ORDER The petitioner, an institution which has been issued with permission to run I and II PUC courses in the year 2017 for the academic years beginning from 2017 - 2018 with intake of 40 subjects for both I and II PUC, is aggrieved by the second respondent's order dated 09.05.2025 [Annexure-A]. The second respondent by the impugned order, in exercise of - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:19260 WP No. 15250 of 2025 powers under Section 39 of the Karnataka Education Act, 1983, has withdrawn the permission granted effective from the academic year 2025-26. 2. It is seen that this impugned order is after Show Cause Notice dated 04.02.2025 [Annexure-M] calling upon the petitioner to show cause why the permission granted must not be withdrawn, and insofar as the reason for withdrawal, the notice only reads that the petitioner does not have the requisite minimum facilities. The notice does not detail any further, and the impugned order also does not elaborate on this. 3. Sri Raju Bhat, the learned counsel for the petitioner, inviting this Court's attention to the Report dated 25.11.2024 filed by the Deputy Director, School Education [Pre-University], Tumakuru District [the third respondent], canvasses that this respondent has, on scrutiny and inspection, recorded that the petitioner has a lease of 30 years; that the petitioner - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:19260 WP No. 15250 of 2025 has permission to run the Pre-University college but it has a building with asbestos sheet roofing and the petitioner will have to ensure there is a fire extinguishing system in the complex, but none of these reasons are the reasons for issuance of show cause notice because the real reason for the notice is the complaint by the landlord's son. The learned counsel submits that the landlord has executed a registered lease deed for 30 years, which is valid and in force. 4. Mrs. P.B. Radha, the learned Additional Government Advocate who was called upon to secure instructions in the light of the petitioner's case that the proceedings are at the instance of the landlord's son as aforesaid, submits that the show cause notice dated 04.02.2025 is issued because the petitioner has not constructed classrooms with the requisite measurement and has not provided other facilities. The learned Additional Government Advocate - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:19260 WP No. 15250 of 2025 proposes to contend that the merits of the petitioner's grievance with the impugned order must be examined in the light of the undertaking filed by the petitioner to comply with all the requirements under the Rules. 5. However, this Court must observe that the Show Cause Notice, which becomes the basis for the impugned order, is as vague as any could be. If action is to be taken for failure to provide facilities as required under the Rules, this Court opines that the notice must spell out and if the notice does not, the entire proceedings will be vitiated, especially when it is seen in conjunction with the assertion that notice is issued at the intervention of vested interest for extraneous reasons. In the light of the afore, ORDER The petition is allowed quashing the impugned order dated 09.05.2025 [Annexure-A] but without prejudice to the respondents-authorities to take action - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:19260 WP No. 15250 of 2025 against the petitioner after issuing notice as is contemplated in law that must pass in law as well. Sd/- (B M SHYAM PRASAD) JUDGE SA ct:sr