- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:20492-DB WA No. 202 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 15TH DAY OF APRIL, 2026 PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR. VIBHU BAKHRU, CHIEF JUSTICE AND THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE C.M. POONACHA WRIT APPEAL NO. 202 OF 2025 (GM-RES) BETWEEN: 1. MR. VAMANA BHAT AGED ABOUT 60 YEARS RESIDING AT SURABHI OPP. PARIVAR OLDAGE HOME NEAR ASHRAYA YUVA VEDIKE ASHRAYA NAGARA, KADAMBODI SURATHKAL - 575 014 MANGALURU …APPELLANT (BY SRI AKSHATHA SHETTY K., ADVOCATE) AND: 1. MR.RAJESH @ RAJESH PAVITHRAN AGED ABOUT 43 YEARS RESIDING AT NO.6-122-7 KULAI MANGALURU DAKSHINA KANNADA DISTRICT: 575 019 2. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA REPRESENTED BY THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY MINISTRY OF HOME Digitally signed by AMBIKA H B Location: High Court of Karnataka - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:20492-DB WA No. 202 of 2025 VIDHANA SOUDHA BENGALURU - 560 001 3. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA REPRESENTED BY THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR DEPARTMENT OF WOMEN AND CHILD DEVELOPMENT MANGALURU DAKSHINA KANNADA DISTRICT …RESPONDENTS (SMT. NAMITHA MAHESH B.G., ADDITIONAL GOVERNMENT ADVOCATE FOR R-2 & 3) THIS WRIT APPEAL IS FILED UNDER SECTION 4 OF THE KARNATAKA HIGH COURT ACT PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE ORDER DATED 30/07/2024 PASSED IN WRIT PETITION NO.21239/2022 AND TO ALLOW THE IMPLEADING APPLICATION FILED BY THE APPELLANT & 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 MR. JUSTICE C.M. POONACHA ORAL JUDGMENT (PER: HON'BLE MR. VIBHU BAKHRU, CHIEF JUSTICE) 1. The appellant has filed the present appeal impugning an order dated 30.07.2024 passed by the learned Single Judge in Writ Petition No.21239/2022 (GM-RES). We note, at the outset, that - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:20492-DB WA No. 202 of 2025 the present appeal has been filed after a delay of 159 days. Although the delay may not be very large, however in the context of the impugned order, the same may be relevant. 2. The above mentioned writ petition was filed by respondent No.1, inter alia, praying that directions be issued to the concerned authorities to consider his application for renewal of the registration of an old age home in the name of The Saffron Foundation and Parivar Home for the Aged located at Ashrayanagar, Surathkal near Mangaluru, Dakshina Kannada District. The learned Single Judge had allowed the petition with a direction to the concerned authorities to consider the writ petitioner's representation and pass appropriate orders after affording the writ petitioner an opportunity to be heard. 3. The appellant is not a party to the said writ petition. However, he had filed an application for impleadment. The appellant is essentially aggrieved by the impugned order to the extent that it disposes of the writ petition without considering the appellant's application for impleadment in the said petition. - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:20492-DB WA No. 202 of 2025 4. It is contented on behalf of the appellant that respondent No.1 has been operating the old age home illegally and it is stated that the appellant has certain documents which may be relevant for deciding whether the writ petitioner's representation ought to be favourably considered. 5. We note that since the learned Single Judge has allowed the writ petition only on the ground that the writ petitioner was not given a sufficient opportunity and on a concession of the learned counsel for the State Authorities that a fair opportunity would be granted to the writ petitioner. 6. In this view, we consider it apposite to dispose of the present appeal by permitting the appellant to also submit any representation or document to oppose the grant of registration to the concerned authorities. 7. We, however, clarify that the same would be considered only if the writ petitioner's application has not been disposed of, as yet. The present order would not be construed as directing the concerned authorities to re-look at the decision already rendered. - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:20492-DB WA No. 202 of 2025 We also clarify that this order will not be considered as precluding the appellant from availing any remedy in accordance with law. 8. The appeal is disposed of in the above terms. 9. The pending interlocutory applications also stand disposed of. Sd/- (VIBHU BAKHRU) CHIEF JUSTICE Sd/- (C.M. POONACHA) JUDGE AHB List No.: 2 Sl No.: 30