Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Karnataka · body

2025 DAILYLAW 88963 (KAR)

NANDAN. N. V. v. KARNATAKA STATE LAW UNIVERSITY

WP/1438/2025 · 2025-09-11

R Devdas

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:36101 WP No. 1438 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 11TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R DEVDAS WRIT PETITION NO.1438 OF 2025 (EDN-RES) BETWEEN: NANDAN N. V. S/O. LATE RAJESH AGED ABOUT 21 YEARS STUDENT, KRISTU JAYANTI COLLEGE OF LAW BENGALURU PRESENTLY R/A #531, MRM KRUPA 1ST MAIN, 1ST CROSS, RAMAIAH LAYOUT BYRATHI, DR. SRK NAGAR POST BENGALURU - 560 077 PERMANENTLY R/A PUTHUKUDI HOUSE ERANHIKKAL P. O. KOZHIKODE DISTRICT KERALA STATE - 673 303. …PETITIONER (BY SMT. ARYA GEORGE, FOR SRI BIJOY M. T., ADVOCATES) AND: 1. KARNATAKA STATE LAW UNIVERSITY REP. BY ITS REGISTRAR NAVANAGAR, HUBBALLI-580 025. 2. THE REGISTRAR (EVALUATION) KARNATAKA STATE LAW UNIVERSITY NAVANAGAR, HUBBALLI - 580 025. 3. KRISTU JAYANTI COLLEGE OF LAW REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL K. NARAYANAPURA, KOTHANUR P. O., BENGALURU – 560 077. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. ASHRITH V. T., FOR; Digitally signed by JUANITA THEJESWINI Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:36101 WP No. 1438 of 2025 SRI. GIRISH KUMAR R., ADVOCATES FOR R-1 AND R-2; SRI. TRIVIKRAM S., ADVOCATE FOR R-3) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO DIRECT THE RESPONDENTS TO PERMIT THE PETITIONER TO ATTEND FOR THE FIFTH SEMESTER UNIVERSITY EXAMINATION SCHEDULED FROM 21.01.2025 AS PER ANNEXURE-G, WITHOUT INSISTING ON COMPLIANCE WITH THE ATTENDANCE REQUIREMENTS AS PER THE NORMS OF THE RESPONDENTS, AS A SPECIAL CASE ON MEDICAL AND HUMANITARIAN GROUNDS. THIS WRIT PETITION IS COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R DEVDAS ORAL ORDER Learned counsel for the petitioner has filed a memo dated 01.09.2025 seeking leave of this Court to withdraw the writ petition, since the petitioner has got transferred from respondent No.3 institution to another institution and the prayer made in the writ petition has become infructuous. 2. The memo is taken on record, subject to all just exceptions. 3. Accordingly, writ petition stands dismissed as withdrawn. Sd/- (R DEVDAS) JUDGE KLY