- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:27341 WP No. 7830 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 21ST DAY OF JULY, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE E.S.INDIRESH WRIT PETITION NO.7830 OF 2025 (EDN-EX) BETWEEN: 1. SRI. THARUN REDDY R. AGED ABOUT 25 YEARS, S/O DR. N. RAMAKRISHNA REDDY R/AT. NO.411, KUMARADHARA BLOCK, NATIONAL GAMES VILLAGE, BENGALURU-560 047. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. ZULFIKIR KUMAR SHAFI, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. VICE CHANCELLOR RAJIV GANDHI UNIVERSITY OF HEALTH SCIENCE, 4TH 'T' BLOCK, JAYANAGAR, BENGALURU 560 041. 2. REGISTRAR, RAJIV GANDHI UNIVERSITY OF HEALTH SCIENCE, 4TH 'T' BLOCK, JAYANAGAR, BENGALURU 560 041. 3. REGISTRAR (EVALUATION) RAJIV GANDHI UNIVERSITY OF HEALTH SCIENCE, Digitally signed by SHARMA ANAND CHAYA Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:27341 WP No. 7830 of 2025 4TH 'T' BLOCK, JAYANAGAR, BENGALURU 560 041. 4. SYNDICATE COMMITTEE REP. BY MEMBER SECRETARY THE REGISTRAR, RAJIV GANDHI UNIVERSITY OF HEALTH SCIENCE, 4TH 'T' BLOCK, JAYANAGAR, BENGALURU 560 041. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. S.P. SHANKAR, SENIOR COUNSEL FOR SMT. MAMATHA KULKARNI, ADVOCATE) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE NOTIFICATION DATED 10.02.2025 BEARING NO.RGUHSB/RRAC/AUTH NO. (GF)/6/2024-AUTH-RGUHS DATED 10.02.2025 VIDE ANNEXURE-A, CONSTITUTION OF THE FACT-FINDING COMMITTEE ON THE ALLEGED, ALLEGATIONS OF IMPERSONATION, MALPRACTICE AND CHEATING IN MBBS EXAMINATION BY THE PETITIONER BASED ON DECISION OF THE 192ND SYNDICATE (SPECIAL) MEETING HELD ON 28.11.2024 PASSED BY THE SECOND RESPONDENT. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE E.S.INDIRESH - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:27341 WP No. 7830 of 2025 ORAL ORDER In this writ petition, the petitioner has sought for quashing the notification dated 10.02.2025 (Annexure-A), by which a Fact-Finding Committee has been constituted to inquire into allegations of impersonation, malpractice, and cheating in the MBBS examination allegedly involving the petitioner, pursuant to the decision taken in the 192nd Syndicate (Special) Meeting held on 28.11.2024 by the respondent No.2 (Annexure-Q). 2. I have heard Sri. Zulfikir Kumar Shafi, learned counsel for the petitioner; Sri. S.P. Shankar, learned Senior Counsel appearing on behalf of learned counsel Smt. Mamatha Kulkarni, for the respondents. 3. Sri. Zulfikir Kumar Shafi, learned counsel for the petitioner invited the attention of the court to letter dated 23.06.2023 produced at Annexure-M - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:27341 WP No. 7830 of 2025 wherein it is shown that, complaint has been received against the father of the petitioner-Dr. Ramakrishna Reddy, who was Registrar (Evaluation) of Rajiv Gandhi University of Health Sciences, Bengaluru, and in this connection, an internal enquiry was conducted and the report of the Committee conveys no evidence found for the said complaint and the allegations made against the father of the petitioner are false and the constitution of Committee at Annexure-A is to harass the petitioner herein, who happens to be the son of Dr. Ramakrishna Reddy, Registrar (Evaluation) of respondent-University. It is also contended by learned counsel for the petitioner that already a report has been filed which declares there is no evidence against the petitioner and that apart Karnataka Lokayukta has conducted an enquiry with regard to the same and arrived at a conclusion that there is no acceptable allegations made against the petitioner and therefore, - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:27341 WP No. 7830 of 2025 the issuance of the impugned order at Annexure- A would cause further harassment to the petitioner herein and accordingly, sought for interference of this Court. It is further argued by the learned counsel for the petitioner by inviting the attention of the court to Minutes of 192nd Syndicate (Special) Meeting produced at Annexure-Q, pointing out that members of the Syndicate who took part in the decision to initiate the enquiry were also part of the Fact-Finding Committee and therefore, such a Committee would not be impartial, and such action amounts to a colorable exercise of power by the respondent-University to harass the petitioner herein who happens to be the son of Registrar (Evaluation) of the respondent- University and accordingly, sought for interference of this court. 4. Per contra, Sri. S. P. Shankar, learned Senior Counsel appearing for the respondent- - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:27341 WP No. 7830 of 2025 University submitted that this Court has limited jurisdiction to interfere in academic matters, particularly, in the constitution of a Fact-Finding Committee by the University’s Syndicate. He referred to Subject No.192/III(2) of the minutes of the meeting held on 28.11.2024, in which serious complaints were recorded regarding alleged malpractice in the MBBS examination particularly involving the petitioner. In that view of these complaints, that the Committee has been constituted as per Annexure-A to examine the allegations thoroughly and to put an end to such allegations against the petitioner and therefore, constitution of the committee has to be confirmed in this writ petition. In this regard, learned Senior Counsel places reliance on the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Gurunanak Dev University v. Saumil Garg, reported in (1993) 4 SCC 401, and - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:27341 WP No. 7830 of 2025 submitted that, this court is having limited jurisdiction to interfere with the academic matters and accordingly, sought for dismissal of the writ petition. 5. In the light of the submission made by the learned counsel appearing for the parties, though several allegations have been made by the learned counsel for the petitioner the impugned order dated 10.02.2025 vide Annexure-A has been passed constituting a Fact Finding Committee regarding alleged impersonation, malpractice, and cheating in the MBBS examination said to have been involved by the petitioner and also the said Committee has been formed despite a report as per Annexures-M and N, finding no evidence. To that effect, on careful perusal of the Subject No.192/III(2) of the Minutes of 192nd (Spl.) Syndicate Meeting held on 28.11.2024, I am of the opinion that, this court is having limited jurisdiction to interfere with the academic matters and - 8 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:27341 WP No. 7830 of 2025 the impugned notification cannot be set aside on the sole ground that the father of the petitioner was Registrar (Evaluation) of the respondent-University, which does not, by itself, render the constitution of the Committee as invalid or malicious. In that view of the matter, I do not find any merit in the writ petition as this court is having limited scope to interfere in such matters. The constitution of a Fact-Finding Committee to look into allegations of impersonation and malpractice falls squarely within the academic and administrative domain of the respondent-University and in view of declaration of law made by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Sanchit Bansal and Another V. Joint Admission Board and Others reported in AIR 2012 SC 214 and in the case Ran Vijay Singh and others V. State of Uttar Pradesh and Others reported in (2018) 2 SCC 357, I am of the opinion that, the writ petition deserves to be - 9 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:27341 WP No. 7830 of 2025 dismissed. However, having regard to the submission made by the petitioner’s counsel, it is directed that the Fact-Finding Committee shall conduct the enquiry in a fair, impartial, and transparent manner. The petitioner shall be afforded fair opportunity before any conclusion is arrived at by the Fact-Finding Committee. The Committee shall submit its report to the respondent-University in accordance with law. With these observations, writ petition is disposed of. SD/- (E.S.INDIRESH) JUDGE SB List No.: 1 Sl No.: 25