- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:19817 WP No. 30744 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. 30744 OF 2024 (S-RES) BETWEEN: 1. PEOPLE'S EDUCATION SOCIETY REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, VIVEKANANDA PRE-UNIVERSITY COLLEGE CAMPUS, GENDEHALLI ROAD, BELUR TOWN, BELUR, HASSAN DISTRICT - 573 115. 2. SRI. SIDDAPPA R S/O RAJANNA, AGED ABOUT 35 YEARS, HOTTAPPANAHALLI POST, M.G. HATTI, CHALLAKERE TALUK - 577 522 CHITRADURGA DISTRICT. …PETITIONERS (BY SRI. PADMANABHA R, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA REPRESENTED BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF PRIMARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION, M.S.BUILDING, DR. AMBEDKAR VEEDHI, BENGALURU - 560 001. 2. THE DIRECTOR FOR PRE UNIVERSITY EDUCATION Digitally signed by SHARADAVANI B Location: High Court of Karnataka - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:19817 WP No. 30744 of 2024 18TH CROSS, SAMPIGE ROAD, MALLESHWARAM - 560 012. 3. THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR PRE-UNIVERSITY HASSAN DISTRICT, HASSAN - 584 101. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. G. RAMESH NAIK, AGA FOR R1 TO R3) THIS W.P. IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTIUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE IMPUGNED ENDORSEMENT BEARING NO. DPUE- EST30LL(LPA)/2/2023-R AND G-1043802 DTD. 14.10.2024 VIDE ANNX-L AND ETC., THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING, 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- EST30LL(LPA)/2/2023-R AND G-1043802 dated 14.10.2024 vide Annexure-L. ii) Issue a writ in the nature of mandamus directing the respondent No.1 and 2 to approve the selection list dated nil selecting the 2nd petitioner to the post of lecturer in Political Science vide Annexure-K. - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:19817 WP No. 30744 of 2024 iii) 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 Lecturer in Political Science, which is a single post, 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; - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:19817 WP No. 30744 of 2024 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. 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 : - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:19817 WP No. 30744 of 2024 ORDER i. Petition is allowed. ii. The Impugned endorsement issued by respondent no.2 vide Annexure-L 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. Sd/- (S.R.KRISHNA KUMAR) JUDGE HNM List No.: 1 Sl No.: 18