- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:26473 WP No. 18861 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 16TH DAY OF JULY, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE E.S.INDIRESH WRIT PETITION NO.18861 OF 2025 (EDN-RES) BETWEEN: 1. SRI. KOUSHIK B K S/O. SRI. B. M. KRISHNA MURTHY, AGED ABOUT 19 YEARS, R/AT NO.1, SANJAY LAYOUT, VINAYAKANAGARA, RAMOHALLI (P), KENGERI (H), NEAR V.R. INTERNATIONAL SCHOOL, BENGALURU -560 074. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. SKANDA KUMAR, ADVOCATE FOR SRI. M.D.RAGHUNATH, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE UNION GOVERNMENT OF INDIA (UNIT MINISTRY OF YOUTH AFFAIRS AND SPORTS) (DEPARTMENT OF SPORTS) HALL NO. 103, JAWAHARLAL NEHRU STADIUM, LODHI ROAD, NEW DELHI-110 003, REPRESENTED BY ITS PRESIDENT. 2. THE KARNATAKA EXAMINATION BOARD 18TH CROSS, SAMPIGE ROAD, MALLESHWARAM, BENGALURU-560 012, REP. BY ITS SECRETARY. 3. DEPARTMENT OF YOUTH EMPOWERMENT AND SPORTS Digitally signed by SHARMA ANAND CHAYA Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:26473 WP No. 18861 of 2025 NRUPATHUNGA ROAD, BANGALORE-560 002, BY ITS COMMISSIONER. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. SURESH H S.,ADVOCATE FOR R1; SMT. B.P. RADHA, AGA FOR R2 AND R3) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO ALLOW THE PETITION. DIRECT THE RESPONDENT NO.3 TO RE-CONSIDER THE APPLICATION OF THE PETITIONER UNDER SPECIAL CATEGORY AS SPORTS, AND QUASH ANNEXURE-D DATED 18.06.2025 ISSUED BY THE RESPONDENT NO.3 i.e. DEPARTMENT OF YOUT EMPOWERMENT AND SPORTS NO. DYES/KRICHAPRO/09/2025-26. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE E.S.INDIRESH ORAL ORDER In this writ petition the petitioner has sought for writ of mandamus, against the respondent No.3, to re- consider the application of the petitioner for allotment of ranking in Common Entrance Test (for short, 'CET) under 'Sports Quota'. - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:26473 WP No. 18861 of 2025 2. I have heard Sri. Skanda Kumar, learned counsel appearing for Sri. M.D. Raghunath, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner; Sri. Suresh H.S., learned counsel appearing for the respondent No.1 and Smt. B.P. Radha, learned Additional Government Advocate appearing for respondent-State. 3. Sri. Skanda Kumar, learned counsel for the petitioner contended that the petitioner had participated in the 67th National School Games 2023- 24 in Taekwondo (Boys U-19) in Betul, Madhya Pradesh, and the 40th National Senior Taekwondo Championship 2024 and merited in the said sports as per Annexure-B series. Learned counsel for the petitioners, by referring to the Circular at Annexure- C submitted that, the petitioner is entitled for the counselling in CET based on the 'Sports Quota' however, it is the petitioner’s grievance that despite meeting these requirements, Respondent No. 3 has - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:26473 WP No. 18861 of 2025 excluded the petitioner from the list of eligible candidates under the ‘Sports Quota’ as per the KEA guidelines and being aggrieved by the same, the petitioner has filed this writ petition. It is further argued that, the petitioner is an eligible student to appear for counselling and the rejection of the same requires to be interfered with in this writ petition. 4. Per contra, Smt. B. P. Radha, the learned Additional Government Advocate for the respondents submitted that the sports event in which the petitioner participated has not been recognized as per the Circular dated 13.05.2025 (Annexure C) and the petitioner’s participation in these sports does not meet the criteria laid down by the Sports Authority of India, and as such, the petitioner’s request for consideration under the ‘Sports Quota’ should be dismissed. - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:26473 WP No. 18861 of 2025 5. In the light of the submission made by the learned counsel appearing for the parties, the grievance of the petitioner is with regard to consideration of his eligibility under 'Sports quota', to participate in the CET counselling. 6. Upon careful examination of the material before the Court, including Annexure B1 and B2, it is evident that the petitioner has actively participated in events sanctioned by the Schools Games Federation of India, as well as the 40th National Senior Taekwondo Championship 2024. Notably, Taekwondo, as evident by Annexure B2, is affiliated with the Indian Olympic Association and is recognized by the Ministry of Youth Affairs and Sports, Government of India. It is also forthcoming from the writ papers that, Taekwondo has been formally recognized by the Ministry of Youth Affairs and Sports, Government of India, as per the notifications dated 14.01.2025 and 08.05.2025 - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:26473 WP No. 18861 of 2025 Annexure R2 and R3 respectively. Therefore, the sports in which the petitioner participated meets the eligibility criteria outlined in the guidelines. In that view of the matter, since the said sports Takewond is recognized as per Annexure- R2 and R3, there is no impediment for the respondent-authorities to re- consider the case of the petitioner to participate in the CET counselling under 'Sports Quota'. In that view of the matter, taking into consideration the relevant Rules produced at Annexure-R1, I find force in the submission made by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the case of the petitioner has to be considered under 'Sports Quota'. In that view of the matter, rejection of case of the petitioner as per Annexure-D at Sl.No.109 is incorrect. Therefore, the respondent No.2 is directed to re-consider the case of the petitioner in the light of the guidelines laid down in the notification dated 13.05.2025 (Annexure-C) and - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:26473 WP No. 18861 of 2025 the relevant Rules as per Annexure-R1 at the earliest within an outer limit of one week from the date of receipt of this order. Accordingly, the writ petition is allowed. The rejection of the petitioner as per Annexure-D at Sl.No.109 is hereby set aside and matter is remitted to the respondent No.2 for fresh consideration. It is made clear that, consideration of the case of the petitioner under 'Sports Quota' shall be in the light of the guidelines at Annexure-C and relevant rules as per Annexure-R1. Therefore, respondent No.2 is directed to re-consider the issue afresh and take decision in the matter and if the petitioner fulfils the eligibility criteria in the light of the observation made above, respondents are directed to take further process in admitting the petitioners. SD/- (E.S.INDIRESH) JUDGE SB:List No.: 1 Sl No.: 74