- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:9780 WP No. 104987 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH DATED THIS THE 5TH DAY OF AUGUST, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURAJ GOVINDARAJ WRIT PETITION NO. 104987 OF 2025 (EDN-EX) BETWEEN: 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. RADHIKA D/O. BASAVARAJ GORAVAR, AGE:. 23 YEARS, OCC. STUDENT. DEEPA D/O. VIRUPAKSHAPPA ANGADI, AGE: 28 YEARS, OCC: STUDENT., CHAITRA D/O. ASHOK MEGALMANI, AGE:: 33 YEARS, OCC: STUDENT., BHAGYASHRI D/O. KARABASAPPA JAMBAGI, AGE:: 26 YEARS, OCC: STUDENT., SUMA K.S. D/O. SHEKHARAPPA, AGE: 35 YEARS, OCC: STUDENT.. BIBI AYESHA MUJAVAR, AGE: 31 YEARS, OCC: STUDENT.. SHAGUPTA D/O. MAHOMMAD KATELI, AGE: 25 YEARS, OCC: STUDENT.. SHRUTHI C.G., AGE: YEARS, OCC: STUDENT.. DEEPIKA H. NAYAK, AGE: 19 YEARS, OCC: STUDENT.. GEETA TALAVAR, AGE: 19 YEARS, OCC: STUDENT.. VINODA L. SUNAGARA. Digitally signed by GIRIJA A. BYAHATTI Location: High Court of Karnataka, Dharwad Bench, Dharwad - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:9780 WP No. 104987 of 2025 12. 13. 14. 15. 16. 17. 18. 19. 20. 21. 22. 23. 24. 25. 26. AGE: 20 YEARS, OCC: STUDENT. PUSHPA MATNAR, AGED: 19 YEARS, OCC: STUDENT. KAVYA C. BHAGAVANTAGOUDAR, AGED: 20 YEARS, OCC: STUDENT. ZAIBABANU D/O. ANSARAHMED HULAGERI, AGE: 30 YEARS, OCC: STUDENT. AFSANA BANU KHAZI D/O. MUSTAFA SAB @ AFSANA BANU HALAGERI, AGE: 25 YEARS, OCC: STUDENT. UMARANI D/O. ASHOK PUJAR, AGED: 28 YEARS, OCC: STUDENT. NAYANA D/O. MARUTI NAIK, AGED: 36 YEARS, OCC: STUDENT. KAMALA TALAVARM AGED: 29 YEARS, OCC: STUDENT. DIVYA S/O. SIDDANATH HIREMATH, AGED: 28 YEARS, OCC: STUDENT. NEELOOFAR D/O. RIYAXAHMED ANANTPUR, AGE: 29 YEARS, OCC: STUDENT. SUMA D/O. SURESH KOPPAD, AGE: 26 YEARS, OCC: STUDENT. YALLAMMA D/O. HONNAPPA HIMMATTI, AGED: 29 YEARS, OCC: STUDENT. PARVEENKOUSAR D/O. GOUSMODIN BALLARI, AGE: 29 YEARS, OCC: STUDENT. KAVYA K.S. D/O. GOUSMODIN BALLARI, AGE: 29 YEARS, OCC: STUDENT. SHOBHA D/O. SHIVAPPA SOSARVI, AGE: 40 YEARS, OCC: STUDENT. SINCHANA D.S. D/O. SADASHIVAYYA, - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:9780 WP No. 104987 of 2025 27. 28. 29. 30. 31. 32. 33. AGE: 25 YEARS, OCC: STUDENT. NAGAVENI M.G. D/O. GOPAL GOWDA, AGE: 24 YEARS, OCC: STUDENT. SHWETA D/O. NAGAPPA PORAPUR, AGED: 26 YEARS, OCC: STUDENT. AISHWARAYA M., AGE: 38 YEARS, OCC: STUDENT. PRATIBHA BADIGER, AGE: 28 YEARS, OCC: STUDENT. NIKITHA D/O. RAJASHEKAR KALABURGI, AGED: 24 YEARS, OCC: STUDENT. MONASHREE B.C. D/O. MAHURUDRAPPA, AGED: 38 YEARS, OCC: STUDENT. FAREEDA D/O. NASIR, AGED: 21 YEARS, OCC: STUDENT. ALL THE PETITIONERS ARE C/O M.K.E.T(R), COLLEGE OF EDUCATION FOR WOMEN MRUTUNJAYA NAGAR, RANEBENNUR, DIST: HAVERI-581115. …PETITIONERS (BY SRI. C R HIREMATH, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. 2. THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY HIGHER EDUCATION DEPARTMENT, M.S. BUILDING, DR. B.R. AMBEDIKAR VIDHI, BENGALURU-560 001. THE VICE CHANCELLOR KARNATAKA STATE AKKAMAHADEVI WOMEN’S UNIVERSITY JNANASHAKTI CAMPUS, TORVI, VIJAYAPURA-586108. - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:9780 WP No. 104987 of 2025 3. 4. 5. THE REGISTER(EVALUTION) KARNATAKA STATE AKKAMAHADEVI WOMEN’S UNIVERSITY JNANASHAKTI CAMPUS, TORVI, VIJAYAPURA-586108. THE PRINCIPAL MUMBAI KARNATAKA EDUCATION TRUST(R) COLLEGE OF EDUCATION FOR WOMEN, RANEBENNUR BESIDE MRITYUNJA KALYANA MANTAP P.B. ROAD, RANEBENNUR DISTRICT: HAVERI-581115 THE DIRECTOR UNIFIED UNIVERSITY AND COLLEGE MANAGE:MENT SYSTEM (UUCMS) KSHEC BUILDING, GANDHINAGAR, BENGALURU-560009. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. P.N.HATTI, HCGP FOR R1 AND R5; SRI B.M.ANGADI, ADVOCATE FOR R2 & R3; SRI U.M.KATTEMANI, ADVOCATE FOR R4) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO ISSUE A WRIT OF MANDAMUS DIRECTION AGAINST THE RESPONDENT NO.1 TO CONSIDER THE REPRESENTATION NO. MKET/EXAM.PRESE/2025/ 1413 DATED. 26.06.2025 MADE BY THE RESPONDENT NO.4, COPY THE SAME IS PRODUCED AND MARKED AT ANNEXURE-A AND ETC. THIS WRIT PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING, THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING: - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:9780 WP No. 104987 of 2025 ORAL ORDER (PER: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURAJ GOVINDARAJ) 1. The Petitioners are before this Court seeking for the following reliefs: a. Issue a writ of mandamus direction against the R1 to consider the representation No. MKET/EXAM. PRESE/2025/ 1413 dated 26.06.2025 made by the R4, copy of the same is produced and marked at Annexure-A. b. Issue a writ of mandamus direction against the R2 & R3 to consider the representations no. MKET/Exm.per for I and III Sem/2025/1417, dated 020.7.2025 and MKET/Examination permt/2025/1418, 04.07.2025 and representation no.MKET/per. for I and III sem/2025/1415 dated 27.6.2025, made by the respondent no.4-college, copy of the same is produced at Annexure-A1 to A3 respectively. c. Any other order or direction in the nature of writ as this Hon’ble Court thinks fit in the facts and circumstances of the case. 2. The Petitioners - STUDENT.s had been admitted to the B.Ed. course for the year 2023-24 with respondent No.4 - College, who had initially been given permission for admission for 50 STUDENT.s, and thereafter, it is claimed that there was an increase made by another 50 STUDENT.s. The initial admission made by Respondent No.4 being for 50 STUDENT.s, the subsequent admission - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:9780 WP No. 104987 of 2025 made including the petitioners by Respondent No.4, came to 83 STUDENT.s. 3. In that background, Respondent No.4 had submitted representations to Respondent No.2 - University on 2.7.2025 and 4.7.2025 at Annexures-A1 to A3, respectively. Similar representation had been submitted by the College on 26.6.2025 at Annexure-A to Respondent No.1. Though the first representation submitted to the Principal Secretary was on 26.6.2025, and the representations submitted to the University were on 2.7.2025 and 4.7.2025, no action has been taken by the respondents in that regard. No orders have been passed and as such, the Petitioners are before this Court seeking for the aforesaid reliefs. 4. Sri.B.M.Angadi, learned counsel for the University, would submit that the representation has been submitted by the College and not by the STUDENT.s; therefore, the Writ Petition is not maintainable on account of the petitioners' not having submitted any representation. Secondly, he submits that Respondent No.4 - College has not complied with all the requirements of Respondent No.2 - University - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:9780 WP No. 104987 of 2025 to pass orders on the representations submitted by Respondent No.4. 5. Even if that be so, it was for Respondent No.2 - University, which is vested with a duty to take care of the interests of the STUDENT.s who are enrolled in the colleges, who are affiliated to the University, to pass necessary orders as expeditiously as possible. Instead of doing so, Respondent No. 2 has now taken a highly technical stand, arguing that since the representations were submitted by the College and not by the STUDENT.s, the Writ Petition is not maintainable. 6. The representation which had been submitted by the College, clearly on the face of it, is in the interest of the petitioners-STUDENT.s, submitted and for and on behalf of the petitioners, who had been enrolled with Respondent No.4 – College. Thus, the representations submitted by Respondent No.4 would enure to the benefit of the petitioners, and in that background, I am of the considered opinion that the Writ Petition is maintainable and the stand taken by the Respondent No.2 – - 8 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:9780 WP No. 104987 of 2025 University, apart from being highly technical, is also malafide. 7. The representations having been submitted on 2.7.2025 and 4.7.2025 to the University is not in dispute. Till now, no orders have been passed by Respondent No.2 – University is also not in dispute, except now tp orally contend that Respondent No.4 has not complied with its obligation. If Respondent No.4 had not complied with the obligation, it was for Respondent No.2 to immediately bring to the notice of Respondent No.4 of such non- compliance. Having received the representation on 2.7.2025 and 4.7.2025, within a period of 7 days orders were required to be passed. Today, as on 5.8.2025, there is no order passed, endorsement issued or reply submitted by the University. The University and its officials, in my considered opinion, have abdicated their responsibilities completely in taking care of the interests of STUDENT.s and putting the college and STUDENT.s on notice about any inadequacies. In that view of the matter, I am of the considered opinion that costs would also have to be imposed on Respondent No.2 - University - 9 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:9780 WP No. 104987 of 2025 and its officials, which shall be paid from the personal funds of those concerned officials. In view of the above, I pass the following: ORDER i) The Writ Petition is partly allowed. ii) Respondent No.1 is directed to consider the representation of Respondent No.4 - College dated 26.6.2025 and pass necessary orders within two weeks from today, without awaiting any order and or recommendation from Respondent No.2 - University. iii) Cost of Rupees One lakh (Rs.1,00,000/-) is imposed, on the University which shall be paid to the account of Karnataka State Legal Services Authority within 4 weeks from today, from the personal funds of the persons who were required to take action on the representation, as determined by the Vice Chancellor of the University. Sd/- (SURAJ GOVINDARAJ) JUDGE PRS / List no.: 1 sl no.: 65