- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:19832 WP No. 30720 of 2024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 9TH DAY OF APRIL, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.R.KRISHNA KUMAR WRIT PETITION NO. 30720 OF 2024 (S-RES) BETWEEN: 1. SREE VEERAPULAKESHI VIDYAVARDHAKA SAMSTHE, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, BADAMI, BAGALKOT DISTRICT - 587 201, UNDER BOMBAY PUBLIC TRUST ACT. 2. SMT. DEEPA K HERAKAL W/O B.V. PATIL, AGED ABOUT 35 YEARS, WORKING AS LECTURER IN CHEMISTRY, SRI. G.M. KALYANASETTY PRE-UNIVERSITY COLLEGE, BADAMI, BAGALKOT DISTRICT - 587 201. 3. HUSENA BASHA S/O MUKTA SAB, AGED ABOUT 32 YEARS, WORKING AS LECTURER IN BIOLOGY, SRI. G.M. KALYANASETTY PRE-UNIVERSITY COLLEGE, BADAMI, BAGALKOT DISTRICT - 587 201. …PETITIONERS (BY SRI. PADMANABHA R, ADVOCATE) Digitally signed by SHARADAVANI B Location: High Court of Karnataka - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:19832 WP No. 30720 of 2024 AND: 1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA REPRESENTED BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY DEPARTMENT OF PRIMARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION, M.S. BUILDING, SRI. AMBEEDKAR VEEDHI BENGALURU - 560 001. 2. THE DIRECTOR FOR PRE-UNIVERSITY EDUCATION 18TH CROSS, SAMPIGE ROAD, MALLESHWARAM - 560 012. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. G. RAMESH NAIK, AGA FOR R1 AND R2) THIS W.P. IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE IMPUGNED ENDORSEMENT BEARING NO. DPUE-EST30EB (LPA)/5/2023/-R AND G (E-1038714) DTD. 23.10.2024 VIDE ANNX-M ISSUED BY R2 AND ETC., THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.R.KRISHNA KUMAR ORAL ORDER In this petition, petitioners seek the following reliefs - "i) Issue a writ in the nature certiorari to quash the impugned endorsement bearing No.DPUE-EST30EB (LPA)/5/2023/-R AND G (E-1038714) dated - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:19832 WP No. 30720 of 2024 23.10.2024 vide Annexure-M issued by Respondent no.2. ii) Issue a writ in the nature of mandamus directing the respondent No.1 and 2 to approve the selection list dated 30.06.2023 by which the 2nd petitioner was selected and appointed as Lecturer in Chemistry vide Annexure-K and extend the benefit of salary grant. iii) Issue a writ in the nature of mandamus directing the respondent No.1 and 2 to approve the selection list dated 30.06.2023 by which the 3rd petitioner was selected and appointed as Lecturer in Biology vide Annexure-L and extend the benefit of salary grant. iv) Issue such other orders, directions as deemed fit in the circumstances of the case and allow this writ petition with exemplary." 2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned counsel for the respondents and perused the material on record. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioners would reiterate the various contentions urged in the petition and invited my attention to the material on record including the impugned endorsement in order to point out that impugned endorsement purporting to apply reservation and roster to the post of a - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:19832 WP No. 30720 of 2024 Lecturer in Chemistry and Lecturer in Biology, respectively, which are single posts, is contrary to law and as such, the impugned endorsement deserves to be set aside and the matter be remitted back to the respondents for consideration afresh in accordance with law. In support of his submission that reservation to a single post is impermissible in law, he has placed reliance upon following judgments - i) State of Karnataka and Others v. K.Govindappa and Another, reported in (2009)1 Supreme Court Cases 1; ii) R.R.Inamdar v. State of Karnataka and Others, reported in (2020)19 Supreme Court Cases 543; iii) Tej Prakash Pathak and Others v. Rajasthan High Court and Others, reported in 2024 SCC OnLine SC 3184; and iv) K. Manjusree v. State of Andhra Pradesh and Another, reported in (2008)3 Supreme Court Cases 512. 4. Per contra, learned A.G.A. would submit that there is no merit in the petition and same is liable to be dismissed. - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:19832 WP No. 30720 of 2024 5. A perusal of the impugned endorsement would indicate that the respondents purported to reserve single post by way of reservation and roster, which is impermissible in law, as held by the Apex Court in the aforesaid judgments. 6. Under these circumstances, I deem it just and appropriate to set aside the impugned endorsement and remit the matter back to respondent no.2 for consideration afresh in accordance with law in the light of the aforesaid judgments. 7. In the result, the following : ORDER i. Petition is allowed. ii. The Impugned endorsement issued by respondent no.2 vide Annexure-M is quashed. iii. The matter is remitted back to respondent no.2 for re-consideration afresh bearing in mind the principles laid down in the aforesaid judgments. (S.R.KRISHNA KUMAR) JUDGE HNM List No.: 1 Sl No.: 0