- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:2506 WP No. 107976 of 2023 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH DATED THIS THE 7TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURAJ GOVINDARAJ WRIT PETITION NO. 107976 OF 2023 (EDN-RES) BETWEEN: 1. SHRI VEER PULIKESHI VIDYAVARDHAK SAMSTHE RURAL AYURVED COLLEGE AND RESEARCH CENTRE OPPOSITE JMFC COURT RAMDURG ROAD, BADAMI TQ: BADAMI, DIST: BAGALKOT REPRESENTED BY PRINCIPAL SRI BASAVARAJ MULKIPATIL S/O MALLIKARJUNGOUDA AGED ABOUT 51 YEARS OCC: PRINCIPAL R/O BADAMI TQ: BADAMI DIST:BAGALKOT 2. SAKSHI D/O RAJU BHUTE AGED ABOUT 20 YEARS OCC: STUDENT R/O C/O RAJU BHUTE NO 34, MAIN ROAD WALSAWANGI NEAR MOTHI VESHI MAROTI MANDIR WALSAWANGI, JALNA MAHARASHTRA 431132 NOW RESIDNET OF SHRI VEER PULIKESHI AYURVEDIC COLLEGE LADIES HOSTEL BADAMI, TQ: BADAMI DIST BAGALKOT …PETITIONERS (BY SRI. G I GACHCHINAMATH ., ADVOCATE) GIRIJA A BYAHATTI Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA DHARWAD BENCH - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:2506 WP No. 107976 of 2023 AND: 1. THE KARNATAKA EXAMINATION AUTHORITY 18TH CROSS, SAMPIGE ROAD, MALLESHWARAM REPRESENTED BY EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR 2. THE COMMISSIONER DIRECTORATE OF AYUSH DHANVANTRI ROAD BENGALURU 560 009 3. 4. THE RAJIV GANDHI UNIVERSITY OF HEALTH SCIENCES KARNATAKA 4TH BLOCK JAYANAGARA BANGALORE -1 REPRESENTED BY ITS REGISTRAR NATIONAL COMMISSION FOR INDIAN SYSTEM OF MEDICINE PLOT NO. T-19, 1ST AND 2ND FLOOR BLOCK-IV, DHANVANTRI BHAVAN ROAD NO. 66, PUNJABI BAGH (WEST) NEW DELHI-110025 REP BY ITS SECRETARY. (AMENDED VIDE COURT ORDER DATED 5.2.2025) …RESPONDENTS (BY SMT. SURABHI KULKARNI., ADVOCATE FOR R1; SRI. V.S. KALASURMATH., AGA FOR R2; SRI. AVINASH BANAKAR., ADVOCATE FOR R3; SRI. AVINASH M. ANGADI., 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 DIRECTING THE RESPONDENT NO. 1 TO CONSIDER THE REPRESENTATION OF THE PETITIONER NO. 2 DATED. 01-12-2023 SENT THROUGH EMAIL PRODUCED AS ANNEXURE-E AND ALSO THE REPRESENTATION DATED. 07-12-2023 PRODUCED AS ANNEXURE-G AND ETC. THIS WRIT PETITION, COMING ON FOR HEARING, THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING: CORAM: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURAJ GOVINDARAJ - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:2506 WP No. 107976 of 2023 ORAL ORDER (PER: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURAJ GOVINDARAJ) 1. The petitioners are before this Court seeking for the following reliefs: i. To issue a writ of Mandamus directing the R1 to consider the representation of the petitioner No.2 dated 1.12.2023 sent through email produced as Annexure-E and also the representation dated 7.12.2023 produced as Annexure-G. ii. Issue a writ of mandamus directing the R1 to issue the KEA Admission order copy in favour of the Petitioner No.2. iii. Issue a writ of mandamus directing the R3 to extend the date of Admission approval of the students insofar as the petitioner No.1 is concerned. iv. Grant such other reliefs as this Hon’ble Court deems fit under the circumstances of the present case including an order for costs may kindly be passed. 2. The grievance of the petitioner No.2 is that she being a student of Petitioner No.1-College has not been formally admitted by Respondent No.1, despite the petitioner No.2 having complied with all the requirements. - 4 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:2506 WP No. 107976 of 2023 3. On an earlier occasion when the matter was argued, Smt.Surabhi Kulkarni., learned counsel for Respondent No.1 submitted that the approved intake for the Petitioner No.1-College was 60 and Respondent No.1 being under the impression that 60 students had already been admitted and the Petitioner No.2 would be the 61st student did not approve the admission, though the entire process had been completed. 4. It is in that background that the concerned authority being National Commission for Indian System of Medicine (NCISM) was brought on record to ascertain from NCISM as regards the total number of students who had been admitted into the Petitioner No.1-College, since the submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner was that there was still a vacancy for which the Respondent No.1 could have approved the admission. - 5 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:2506 WP No. 107976 of 2023 5. Sri.Avinash M.Angadi., learned counsel who appears for Respondent No.4 today, categorically submits on instructions that the approved intake of Petitioner No.1-College is 60 and Petitioner No.2 is the 60th student admitted into the Petitioner No.1-College and such admission would be within the approved intake. 6. That being so, Petitioner No.2 having appeared for the counselling session and only reason why the approval of admission was not granted being as regards the issue about the approved intake, I am of the considered opinion that the petition is required to be allowed. 7. In that view of the matter, I pass the following; ORDER i. The writ petition is allowed. - 6 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:2506 WP No. 107976 of 2023 ii. Since respondent No.4 has submitted that the Petitioner No.2 would be the 60th student. It would be for Respondent No.4 to pass formal orders in pursuance of which Respondent No.2 would also have to pass formal orders. iii. The orders to be passed within 15 days. In the meanwhile, if any exams are scheduled, Petitioner No.2 ought to be permitted to take up such exams. iv. The above order being passed in the peculiar cisrcumstances of the case shall not be treated as a precedent. Sd/- (SURAJ GOVINDARAJ) JUDGE SR List No.: 1 Sl No.: 82