- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:29819-DB WP No. 18859 of 2024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 31ST DAY OF JULY, 2025 PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE D K SINGH AND THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VENKATESH NAIK T WRIT PETITION NO.18859 OF 2024 (EDN-RES) BETWEEN: SHREYAS SHIVAJI NALAWADE SON OF SHIVAJI ANANT NALAWADE AGED ABOUT 20 YEARS PRESENTLY RESIDING AT SIDDHARTHA MEDICAL COLLEGE CAMPUS HOSTEL, T. BEGUR NELAMANGALA- 562 123. …PETITIONER (BY SRI AMBRISH B.N., ADVOCATE, FOR SRI SANTHOSH S. NAGARALE) AND: 1. THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY DEPARMENT OF EDUCATION GOVERNMENT OF KARNATAKA M.S. BUILDING BENGALURU-560 001. 2. KARNATAKA EXAMINATIONS AUTHORITY 18TH CROSS, SAMPIGE ROAD MALLESHWARAM BENGALURU-560 012 REPRESENTED BY ITS DIRECTOR. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI SUDEV HEGDE, A.G.A., FOR R-1 AND R-2) * * * Digitally signed by MOUNESHWARAPPA NAGARATHNA Location: High Court of Karnataka - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:29819-DB WP No. 18859 of 2024 THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO DECLARE THAT RULE 12(5) OF KARNATAKA SELECTION OF CANDIDATES FOR ADMISSION TO GOVERNMENT SEATS IN PROFESSIONAL EDUCATIONAL INSTITUTIONS RULES 2006 IS VIOLATIVE OF ARTICLES 19 AND 21 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, IN SO FAR AS THE PETITIONER IS CONCERNED, AND ETC. THIS WRIT PETITION IS COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE D K SINGH and HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VENKATESH NAIK T ORAL ORDER (PER: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE D K SINGH) The petitioner appeared for Common Entrance Test-2023 for taking admission in Engineering course conducted by the Karnataka Government. After counselling, the petitioner was allotted Vivekananda Institute of Technology, Gudimavu, Kengeri. The petitioner paid fee of ₹6,25,590/- (Rupees six lakh twenty-five thousand five hundred and ninety). The petitioner started course in the College and cleared two semesters in the said Engineering College. When the petitioner was pursuing third semester, he got selected for M.B.B.S. course and he was allotted Siddhartha Medical College, T. Begur, Nelamangala, to pursue M.B.B.S. course from the said College. The petitioner, now, wants refund of the fee paid by him for taking admission in the engineering course from Vivekananda Institute of - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:29819-DB WP No. 18859 of 2024 Technology. The Prospectus issued by the Government in the year-2006 for Common Entrance Test Examination (Annexure-E) provides that if a candidate does not surrender or cancel or fail to join the allotted college even after the completion of counselling for the Casual Vacancies Round, the Karnataka Examinations Authority would be entitled to forfeit the entire fee amount paid by a candidate. 2. Rule 12(5) of the said Prospectus reads as under: "12. Forfeiture and Refund of fee.- (5) If a candidate does not surrender or cancel or fail to join the allotted college even after the completion of the Casual Vacancy Round, the Executive Director, Karnataka Examinations Authority shall forfeit the entire fee amount paid by the candidates." 3. Here, the petitioner not only took admission, but also cleared two semesters of the course in Vivekananda Institute of Technology and thereafter, he got selected to pursue M.B.B.S. course and took admission in Siddhartha Medical College. In view of the unambiguous provisions as provided under Rule 12(5) of the Prospectus, we find no merit in this writ petition - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:29819-DB WP No. 18859 of 2024 and no direction can be issued for refunding the fee paid by the petitioner for taking admission in the engineering course in Vivekananda Institute of Technology. 4. The challenge to Rule 12(5) of the Prospectus is not supported by any cogent submission made on behalf of the petitioner. We cannot go behind the intention of providing the said Rule when we find that the Rule is either arbitrary, or violation of the provisions of the constitution, particularly, fundamental rights under Articles 14, 15 and 21 of the Constitution of India, 1950, or any other statute. Therefore, challenge to Rule 12(5) of the Prospectus has no force and thus, the writ petition stands dismissed. Sd/- (D K SINGH) JUDGE Sd/- (VENKATESH NAIK T) JUDGE KVK List No.: 1 Sl No.: 12