SRI R PUTTAREVEGOWDA v. THE NITHYANADA EDUCATION SOCIETY
WA/1559/2025 · 2026-07-02
K S Hemalekha
body2026
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2026 DAILYLAW 25795 (KAR) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2026 DAILYLAW 25795 (KAR) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
- 1 -
HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:32824-DB WA No. 1559 of 2025
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 2ND DAY OF JULY, 2026
PRESENT
THE HON'BLE MR. VIBHU BAKHRU, CHIEF JUSTICE
AND
THE HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE K.S. HEMALEKHA
WRIT APPEAL NO. 1559 OF 2025 (EDN-RES)
BETWEEN:
1.
SRI R PUTTAREVEGOWDA S/O LATE REVEGOWDA AGED ABOUT 62 YEARS R/AT PIPELINE ROAD MAHADEVESHWARA BADAVANE KANAKAPURA TOWN RAMANAGARA DISTRICT - 562 117.
2.
SRI. DAYANANDA HP AGED ABOUT 36 YEARS S/O R.PUTTAREVEGOWDA R/AT PIPELINE ROAD MAHADEVESHWARA BADAVANE KANAKAPURA TOWN RAMANAGARA DISTRICT - 562 117.
3.
SMT. SOWMYA D/O PUTTAREVEGOWDA W/O MANU K AGED ABOUT 32 YEARS R/AT MADILUNILAYA BHAGAVATHI LAYOUT 4TH CROSS, ARALIMARADA PALYA ROAD SIRA GATE, TUMAKURU - 572106 …APPELLANTS (BY SRI. KIRAN K.T, ADVOCATE)
Digitally signed by AMBIKA H B Location: High Court of Karnataka
- 2 -
HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:32824-DB WA No. 1559 of 2025
AND:
1.
THE NITHYANADA EDUCATION SOCIETY REGISTERED UNDER THE KARNATAKA SOCIETIES REGISTRATION ACT, 1960.
REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY SMT. SOMAPRABHA W/O GANGAIAH AGED ABOUT 65 YEARS NO. 16, PRASHANTHAGARA T DASARAHALLI BANGALORE - 560 057
2.
THE STATE OF KARNATAKA SCHOOL EDUCATION AND LITERACY DEPARTMENT REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY M.S.BUILDING BANGALORE - 560 001
3.
THE COMMISSIONER SCHOOL EDUCATION AND LITERACY DEPARTMENT NRUPATUNGA ROAD BANGALORE - 560 001
4.
THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR BANGALORE NORTH SCHOOL EDUCATION AND LITERACY DEPARTMENT KEMPEGWODA ROAD BANGALORE - 560 009
5.
THE BLOCK EDUCATION OFFICER SCHOOL EDUCATION AND LITERACY DEPARTMENT BANGALORE NORTH ZONE-4 YELAHANKA NEAR BUS STOP BANGALORE - 560 064 …RESPONDENTS (SRI K.S. HARISH, GA FOR R-2 TO R-5)
THIS WRIT APPEAL FILED UNDER SECTION 4 OF THE KARNATAKA HIGH COURT ACT PRAYING TO SET ASIDE ORDER PASSED IN WP NO.22363/2024 PASSED BY THE LEARNED SINGLE
- 3 -
HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:32824-DB WA No. 1559 of 2025
JUDGE OF THIS HONBLE COURT DATED 10/06/2025 BY ALLOWING HIS WRIT APPEAL AND ETC.
THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY,
JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER:
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. VIBHU BAKHRU, CHIEF JUSTICE and HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE K.S. HEMALEKHA
ORAL JUDGMENT
(PER: HON'BLE MR. VIBHU BAKHRU, CHIEF JUSTICE)
1. For the reasons stated in the application ‒ I.A No.1/2026, the same is allowed. The 59-day delay in filing the appeal is condoned.
2. The appellants have filed the present appeal impugning an
order dated 10.06.2025 passed by the learned Single Judge in Writ Petition No.22363/2024 (EDN-RES). The respondent society had filed the said writ petition, inter alia, praying that a direction be issued to the respondent authorities (respondent Nos. 2 to 5) to renew the recognition of Geetha Kannada Nursery and Primary School by considering the representation dated 10.07.2024. 3. Admittedly, Geetha Kannada Nursery and Primary School is being run in a property described as No.16 measuring east to west 40 + 38/2 ft. or 11.89 mtrs. and north to south 30 ft. or 9.14 mtrs. at
- 4 -
HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:32824-DB WA No. 1559 of 2025
Prashant Nagar, T. Dasarahalli, Bengaluru - 560 057 [hereinafter referred to as school property]. The school property was purchased in the name of Smt.T.V.Vijayalakshmi on 17.11.1980. At the material time, she was aged about 19 years. It is also stated that the funds to purchase the said property were provided by her father, Sri. T. V. Veeregowda. Sri. Veeregowda had obtained permission to start a nursery and primary school in Kannada medium under the name of the respondent society, which he established in 1980. The appellants in the present case are claiming rights to the school property. 4. Sri T.V.Veeregowda and Smt.T.V.Vijayalakshmi were members of the respondent society. It is stated that Smt.T.V.Vijaylakshmi expired on 29.07.1987 and Sri T.V.Veeregowda expired on 22.02.2014. The appellants were arrayed as respondent Nos. 5 to 7 in the writ petition and are claiming title to the school property. 5. It is contended that there is no subsisting lease in favour of the respondent society. It is in the aforesaid background that the
- 5 -
HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:32824-DB WA No. 1559 of 2025
appellants contend that the respondent society is not entitled to any renewal of the recognition of the school in its favour. 6. The learned Single Judge had rejected the said contentions, noticing that the stipulation that the school must have title to the property or at least a registered lease for a minimum period of 30 years was introduced in the year 2018. However, the school in question was operating in the school property well before the introduction of any condition that the society/trust must hold title or a registered lease for a minimum period of 30 years with respect to the property on which the school is run.
Accordingly, the learned Single Judge reasoned that the said stipulation would not disentitle the school in question to recognition by the respondent authorities. 7. We may note that the respondent authorities have not filed an appeal or challenged the impugned decision. 8. The learned Government Advocate appears on advance notice and submits that the recognition has since been granted pursuant to the impugned order. - 6 -
HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:32824-DB WA No. 1559 of 2025
9. We may, at this stage, note that the learned Single Judge had also preserved the rights of the appellants and observed that all questions regarding the title of the school property between the appellants and the society would have to be examined in the properly instituted proceedings. Since all the appellants’ rights, if any, regarding the school property are reserved, they are not precluded from instituting appropriate proceedings to assert them. We are unable to accept that the appellants can raise any legitimate grievances regarding the recognition being granted to the school in question. 10. The appeal is unmerited and accordingly, dismissed. 11. The pending interlocutory application also stands disposed of. Sd/- (VIBHU BAKHRU) CHIEF JUSTICE
Sd/- (K.S. HEMALEKHA) JUDGE
AHB, List No.: 2 Sl No.: 23