- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:36771 WP No. 22687 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 16TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE B M SHYAM PRASAD WRIT PETITION NO. 22687 OF 2025 (GM-RES) BETWEEN: TUMKUR DASARA SAMITHI REGISTERED UNDER THE KARNATAKA SOCIETIES REGISTRATION ACT. SRI RAMA COMPLEX, 1ST CROSS, MG ROAD, TUMKURU-572101. REP. BY SECRETARY SRI. B. S. MALLESHAIAH. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. B. MADHUSUDHAN ADIGA., ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE, ROOM NO. 627, M S BUILDING, VI FLOOR, GATE I, DR. BR AMBEDKAR VEEDHI, BANGALORE- 560001. 2. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA DEPARTMENT OF HOME, VIDHANA SOUDHA, BANGALORE-560 001. REP. BY THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY. 3. THE DIRECTOR, DIRECTORATE OF MUNICIPAL ADMINISTRATION Digitally signed by VANAMALA N Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:36771 WP No. 22687 of 2025 9TH FLOOR AND 10TH FLOOR, VISHVESHWARIAH TOWER, DR. B.R. AMBEDKAR VEEDHI, BENGALURU -560001. 4. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER, TUMKUR DISTRICT, MINI VIDHANA SOUDHA, TUMKUR 572101 5. THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, TUMKUR DISTRICT, S P OFFICE, TUMKUR-572102. 6. THE COMMISSIONER. NEW TUMKUR MAHANAGAR PHALIKE, GANDHINAGAR, TUMKUR- 572102. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. K. SHASHI KIRAN SHETTY, AG, A/W SRI. V.G. BHANUPRAKASH, AAG A/W SMT. NAVYA SHEKHAR, AGA FOR R1 TO R5 SRI. R. SUBRAMANYA, ADVOCATE FOR R6) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO ISSUE A WRIT OF MANDAMUS OR ANY OTHER WRIT OF LIKE NATURE OR ORDER OR DIRECTION, DIRECTING THE RESPONDENTS TO IMMEDIATELY ACT ON THE REPRESENTATIONS OF THE PETITIONERS VIDE ANNEXURE M DATED 9-6-2025, M1 DATED 11-6-2025 AND ANNEXURE N AND P DATED 18-7-2025 BY GRANTING PERMISSION TO THE PETITIONER TO CELEBRATE DUSSERRA FESTIVITIES IN TUMKUR TOWN FROM 30-09-2025 TO 07-10-2025 AT GOVERNMENT - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:36771 WP No. 22687 of 2025 JUNIOR COLLEGE ROAD, BH ROAD, TUMKUR, WITHIN 10 DAYS AND GRANT SUCH OTHER OR FURTHER ORDERS AS THIS HONBLE COURT MAY DEEM FIT IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR FRESH MATTERS LIST, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE B M SHYAM PRASAD ORAL ORDER The petitioner, a 'Society' registered under the Karnataka Societies Registration Act, 1960, seeks directions to the respondents to act upon its different representations and permit it to celebrate Dasara [the festivities] from 30.09.2025 to 07.10.2025 in the grounds next to Government Junior College Road- B.H. Road, Tumakuru. This Court, on 10.09.2025, while recording the submissions on behalf of the State Government by Sri K Shashi Kiran Shetty, the learned Advocate General, has observed that the District Administration is not averse to include the petitioner in organising the festivities and that the jurisdictional Deputy Commissioner, as part of - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:36771 WP No. 22687 of 2025 District Administration overseeing the festivities, must also interact with the petitioner’s representatives. 2. It is now placed on record that the petitioner has filed another representation with the District Administration on 11.09.2025; and in response, the Deputy Commissioner has caused Endorsement dated 15.09.2025 informing the petitioner that the District Administration has constituted a primary committee and another twenty- three Sub-Committees; that the five representatives from the petitioner’s side could be part of the primary committee and that a petitioner’s representative could be included in certain Sub-committees. 3. Sri B Madhusudhan Adiga, the learned counsel for the petitioner, submits that notwithstanding the Endorsement the petitioner's specific case is that, because it was organising the festivities earlier, any decision to organise the - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:36771 WP No. 22687 of 2025 festivities to be fair must be to permit the petitioner to organize the festivities and the decision by the State Government to organize the festivities itself is not fair. The learned counsel also submits that the petitioner, in the alternative, must be permitted to organise the festivities simultaneously with the festivities organised by the District Administration and that the petitioner will not seek any fund or assistance otherwise from the State Government. 4. As against these submissions, Sri K Shashi Kiran Shetty who is supported by Sri Bhanu Prakash, a learned Additional Advocate General, submits that: • even in the past i.e., prior to the previous year the State was sponsoring the festivities through the petitioner's organization but in the last year, as a matter of policy decision, the State Government has held the festivities itself without sponsoring an outside agency, and - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:36771 WP No. 22687 of 2025 therefore, different Committees have been constituted comprising persons from the different cross-sections for this year’s celebrations, • the petitioner's insistence to organise the festivities on its own must not only be considered in the light of the refusal to be part of the Committees constituted by the State Government but also that the petitioner cannot insist upon a right to the exclusion of the State Government. 5. These rival submissions present a narrow canvass for decision, and such canvass is because of the question: whether this Court must, in the circumstances, issue any direction to the State Government to permit the petitioner to organise the festivities by itself or simultaneous festivities sponsored by itself in a part of the same ground. As is canvassed, the petitioner cannot assert a right in - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:36771 WP No. 22687 of 2025 itself to the exclusion of the State Government, especially when the petitioner's own case is that even in the past, it was organising events with State funds though partially. 6. The petitioner cannot assert a right; and if the petitioner cannot assert a right, there will be no infringement, and if there is no infringement, there will be nothing to redress. The petitioner cannot even be permitted to organize simultaneous festivities in a part of the same ground as a concession, and that should be a decision by the State Government considering a multitude of factors. Further, this Court, in the light of the details furnished on the previous hearing date about the constitution of the primary committee and the different committees and the District Administration's willingness to accommodate the petitioner’s representatives not just in the primary Committee but also in the other Sub- - 8 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:36771 WP No. 22687 of 2025 Committees, is of the view that there cannot be any allegations of arbitrariness or lack of fairness. As such, the petition is rejected. Sd/- (B M SHYAM PRASAD) JUDGE AN/-