- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC-K:1261 WP No. 200505 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA KALABURAGI BENCH DATED THIS THE 24TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R.NATARAJ WRIT PETITION NO.200505 OF 2025 (S-DIS) BETWEEN: BHEEMSHA S/O VENKAPPA PATIL, AGE: 39 YEARS, OCC: ASSISTANT TEACHER, SRI. KUMAR SWAMIJI HIGHER PRIMARY SCHOOL, BHALKI, R/O MUDBI WADI, TQ. BASAVAKALYAN, DIST. BIDAR-585437. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. R. J. BHUSARE, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA DEPARTMENT OF SCHOOL EDUCATION AND LITERACY VIDHAN SOUDHA, AMBEDKAR VEEDHI, BANGALORE-01 2. THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR PUBLIC INSTRUCTION (ADMIN) DEPARTMENT OF SCHOOL EDUCATION, BIDAR-585401. 3. THE BLOCK EDUCATION OFFICER, TQ. BHALKI DIST. BIDAR-585328. 4. SHIVASHAKTI EDUCATION SOCIETY, REP BY ITS PRESIDENT BHALKI, DIST. BIDAR-585328. Digitally signed by SACHIN Location: High Court Of Karnataka - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC-K:1261 WP No. 200505 of 2025 5. THE HEAD MASTER, SRI KUMAR SWAMIJI HIGHER PRIMARY SCHOOL, BHALKI DIST. BIDAR-585328. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. SHESHADRI JAISHANKAR, AGA FOR R1 TO R3) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO ALLOW THIS WRIT PETITION AND ISSUE A WRIT OF CERTIORARI OR ANY OTHER APPROPRIATE WRIT OR ORDER OR DIRECTION TO A) QUASH THE ORDER PASSED BY THE 4TH RESPONDENT DATED 01.01.2025 BEARING NO. SSES/01/2025-AMANATU ADESHA DINANKA 01.01.2025/01 PRODUCED AT ANNEXURE-A. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R.NATARAJ ORAL ORDER Petitioner has challenged an order of suspension issued by the respondent No.5. 2. The respondent No.5 is neither a State nor an instrumentality of the State nor other authority as defined under Article 12 of the Constitution of India, amenable to the jurisdiction of this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. This apart, there is an equally - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC-K:1261 WP No. 200505 of 2025 efficacious remedy available under Section 131 of the Karnataka Education Act, 1983. Therefore, the petition is not maintainable before this Court. 3. Hence, the writ petition is dismissed as not maintainable. However, liberty is reserved to the petitioner to approach the concerned authority under Section 131 of the Karnataka Education Act, 1983. 4. Office is directed to return the original of the impugned letter of suspension to learned counsel for the petitioner after retaining a photocopy of the same. 5. It is needless to mention that the time consumed in pursuing this writ petition shall be deducted while calculating the limitation applicable to a revision petition. Sd/- (R.NATARAJ) JUDGE NJ List No.: 1 Sl No.: 16 CT:SI