Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Karnataka · body

2025 DAILYLAW 35898 (KAR)

K SANNASIDDAPPA v. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA

WP/77/2025 · 2025-02-13

S G Pandit

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC:6448 WP No. 77 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 13TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE S.G.PANDIT WRIT PETITION NO.77 OF 2025 (S-RES) BETWEEN: 1. K. SANNASIDDAPPA S/O LATE KARIYAPPA, AGED ABOUT 61 YEARS, RETIRED LECTURER IN HISTORY, BAPUJI PRE-UNIVERSITY COLLEGE, HORAPETE, TUMKURU DISTRICT-572 102 2. M.P. REVANNA, S/O PUTTASWAMY.S, AGED ABOUT 57 YEARS, LECTURER IN COMMERCE, JSS PU COLLEGE, HULLAHALLI, NANJANAGUDU TALUK, MYSORE DISTRICT-571 301 3. DINESH KUMAR. N V, S/O LATE N.S VEERABHADRAPPA, AGED ABOUT 53 YEARS, LECTURER IN POLITICAL SCIENCE, BEGUR GANGAMMA PU COLLEGE, RAMAGIRI, HOLLAKERE TALUK, CHITRADURGA DISTRICT-577 539 Digitally signed by KAVYA R Location: High Court of Karnataka - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC:6448 WP No. 77 of 2025 4. SHANTHARAM SHETTY, S/O MANJAIAH SHETTY, AGED ABOUT 54 YEARS LECTURER IN HINDI, DR. N.S.A.M PU COLLEGE, NITTE, KARKALA TALUK, UDUPI DISTRICT-574 104 …PETITIONERS (BY SRI. G.T. KUMAR, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA REPTD. BY THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF PRIMARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION, M.S. BUILDINGS, BANGALORE-560 001 2. THE DIRECTOR, DEPARTMENT OF PRE-UNIVERSITY EDUCATION, 18TH CROSS, SAMPIGE ROAD, MALLESHWARAM, BANGALORE-560 003 3. THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR, DEPARTMENT OF PRE-UNIVERSITY EDUCATION, TUMKUR DISTRICT, TUMUKURU-572101 - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC:6448 WP No. 77 of 2025 4. THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR, DEPARTMENT OF PRE-UNIVERSITY EDUCATION, MYSORE DISTRICT, MYSORE-570007 5. THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR, DEPARTMENT OF PRE-UNIVERSITY EDUCATION, CHITRADURGA DISTRICT, CHITRADURGA-577501 6. THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR DEPARTMENT OF PRE-UNIVERSITY EDUCATION UDUPI DISTRICT, UDUPI-576101 …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. V.SHIVAREDDY, AGA) THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO I) QUASHING THE IMPUGNED ORDER IN THE FORM OF ENDORSEMENT DATED 06/04/2024 BEARING NODPUE-EST3/25/2023-PLCY (E-1040341) ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENTS VIDE ANNEXURE-Z SUPRA AS ILLEGAL, ARBITRARY AND UNSUSTAINABLE IN NATURE AND ETC. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE S.G.PANDIT - 4 - NC: 2025:KHC:6448 WP No. 77 of 2025 ORAL ORDER The petitioners are before this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, questioning the Endorsement bearing No.DPUE-EST3/25/2023-PLCY (e-1040341) dated 06.04.2024 at Annexure-Z issued by respondent No.2-Department of Pre-University Education. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the above stated Endorsement is in pursuance to the direction of this Court in W.P.No.22824/2021 dated 06.06.2023. Therefore, he submits that writ petition would be maintainable before this Court and the petitioners need not avail appeal remedy. 3. Section 130 of the Karnataka Education Act, 1983 (for short '1983 Act') provides remedy of appeal against the order passed by the Authorities. When a Statute provides for an alternate remedy, this Court normally would not entertain the petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. The petitioners were before this Court earlier in W.P.No.22824/2021 praying for writ of mandamus to consider their representation. This Court by order dated 06.06.2023 directed the concerned - 5 - NC: 2025:KHC:6448 WP No. 77 of 2025 respondent to consider the representation of the petitioners and pass order. When their representation is considered and Endorsement is issued, the remedy for the petitioners is to avail appeal remedy as provided under Section 130 of the 1983 Act. Merely because the Endorsement is issued in terms of direction issued by this Court to consider representation of the petitioners, it would not mean that the petitioners are exempted from availing the appeal remedy under Section 130 of the 1983 Act. Hence, the writ petition is disposed of with liberty to the petitioners to avail appeal remedy under Section 130 of the 1983 Act. 4. I am sure, if the petitioners file an appeal, the Appellate Authority would consider the appeal and dispose of the same expeditiously. Sd/- (S.G.PANDIT) JUDGE SMJ List No.: 1 Sl No.: 23