- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:47495 WP No. 22672 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 18TH DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURAJ GOVINDARAJ WRIT PETITION NO. 22672 OF 2025 (GM-RES) BETWEEN: KOLAR DISTRICT DRIVING SCHOOLS OWNERS ASSOCIATION REPRESENTED BY ITS PRESIDENT C/O KOLARAMMA DRIVING SCHOOL, 1ST FLOOR, BANGARPET ROAD, NEAR R T O OFFICE, KOLAR 563 101 …PETITIONER (BY SRI.Y.M.JOSEPH, ADVOCATE FOR SRI. K S NARESH SANTHOSH, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. STATE OF KARNATAKA REPRESENTED BY PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORT, VIKASA SOUDHA, BENGALURU 560 001. 2. THE COMMISSIONER OF TRANSPORT, 1ST FLOOR, TTM C BUILDING, BMTC COMPLEX, SHANTHINAGAR, BENGALURU 560 020. 3. THE SECRETARY TRANSPORT DEPARTMENT, M.S. BUILDING, BENGALURU 560001. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI.SIDARTH BABU RAO, AGA FOR R1 TO R3) THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 & 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO (1) ISSUE A WRIT OF CERTIORARI OR ANY OTHER WRIT OR DIRECTION QUASHING THE ORDER DATED 16.10.2015 IN NO.SA.RI, E. 19 SA.E.PA. 2014, BENGALURU ISSUED BY THE GOVERNMENT OF KARNATAKA, A COPY OF WHICH IS PRODUCED AT ANNEXURE-B WHICH IS MADE Digitally signed by SHWETHA RAGHAVENDRA Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:47495 WP No. 22672 of 2025 COMPULSORY BY THE LATER MEMORANDUM DATED 17.2.2025 IN NO.SA.AA/PEEKA-3/PR-76/2014-15 ISSUED BY THE COMMISSIONER OF TRANSPORT, BENGALURU A COPY OF WHICH IS PRODUCED AT ANNEXURE-J, IN SO FAR AS PETITIONER ONLY, TO MEET THE ENDS OF JUSTICE, OR IN THE ALTERNATIVE AND ETC., THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING IN 'B' GROUP, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURAJ GOVINDARAJ ORAL ORDER 1. The petitioner is before this Court seeking for the following reliefs; (i) Issue a writ of certiorari or any other writ or direction quashing the order dated 16.10.2015 in No.SA.RI, E. 19 SA.E.PA. 2014, Bengaluru issued by the government of Karnataka, a copy of which is produced at Annexure-B which is made compulsory by the later memorandum dated 17.2.2025 in No.SA.AA/PEEKA-3/PR-76/2014-15 issued by the commissioner of transport, Bengaluru a copy of which is produced at annexure-j, in so far as petitioner only, to meet the ends of justice, or in the alternative. (ii) Issue, a writ of mandamus or any other writ or direction directing the respondents to consider the representations dated 3.7.2025 copies of which are produced at Annexures-K and L and pass appropriate orders as expeditiously as possible and till then not to enforce such one day's refresher training for renewal of heavy vehicle driving licenses, to meet the ends of justice. iii) Issue any other writ or direction as this Hon'ble court may deem fit in the facts and circumstances of the case, in so far as petitioner is concerned only. - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:47495 WP No. 22672 of 2025 2. The Commissioner of Transport, respondent No.2 having issued a letter dated 17.02.2021 making it compulsory for one day’s refresher training in terms of earlier Govt. Order dated 16.10.2025 for a one day refresher training to be availed of before renewal of heavy goods vehicle, the petitioner is before this Court. 3. The petitioner is the driving school owners’ association who is before this Court seeking for the aforesaid relief. 4. The requirement of having a refresher training is only that of the licence holder who can have a grievance if at all. Be that as it may, even the licence holder seeking for renewal cannot have such a grievance inasmuch as when renewal is sought for, the State, in its wisdom, has thought it fit that the ability of the driver is to be checked before renewal of the licence. 5. A perusal of the petition also indicates that a memorandum had been issued by the Commissioner - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:47495 WP No. 22672 of 2025 of Transport extending the jurisdiction for training institute, it is probably for that reason that the Driving School Owners Association viz., the petitioner is before this Court. 6. The requirement of a refresher course for the renewal of a licence cannot cause any harm and injury to the petitioner, let alone the licence holder seeking renewal inasmuch as it is for the licence holder to establish that he continues to be fit and competent to drive the heavy goods vehicle. In that view of the matter, I pass the following: ORDER i. The writ petition is dismissed. ii. Though it is a fit case to impose costs on the petitioner, this court refrains from the same. SD/- (SURAJ GOVINDARAJ) JUDGE LN List No.: 1 Sl No.: 66