Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Karnataka · body

2026 DAILYLAW 49794 (KAR)

SRI VANI EDUCATION CENTRE SCHOOL v. THE DISTRICT EDUCATION REGULATORY AUTHORITY

WP/22742/2022 · 2026-01-21

Ashok S Kinagi

body2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:3489 WP No. 22742 of 2022 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 21ST DAY OF JANUARY, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK S.KINAGI WRIT PETITION NO. 22742 OF 2022 (EDN-RES) BETWEEN: SRI VANI EDUCATION CENTRE SCHOOL AFFILIATED TO CBSE NO. 830082 REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL VISHWANATHA K R AT ‘HANUMAVANA’ NO.143, BAPAGRAMA POST MAGADI ROAD, MACHOHALLI BENGALURU - 560091 …PETITIONER (BY SRI. SAMPAT ANAND SHETTY., ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE DISTRICT EDUCATION REGULATORY AUTHORITY REP. BY ITS DEPUTY DIRECTOR (ADMIN) CUM MEMBER SECRETARY OF DERA COMMITTEE BANGALORE NORTH DISTRICT, K G ROAD BANGALORE DISTRICT – 560009 2. THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR (ADMINISTRATION) BENGALURU NORTH DIVISION DDPI OFFICE OF THE DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC INSTRUCTIONS BANGALORE NORTH DISTRICT Digitally signed by KIRAN KUMAR R Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:3489 WP No. 22742 of 2022 K G ROAD BENGALURU DISTRICT – 560009 3. THE BLOCK EDUCATION OFFICER (BEO) BANGALORE NORTH BLOCK-1 DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC INSTRUCTIONS DIET BUILDING P AND T ROAD 2ND STAGE, RAJAJINAGAR BANGALORE DISTRICT – 56010 4. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA REP BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION AMBEDKAR VEEDHI VIDHANA SOUDHA BENGALURU – 560001 5. RAVI KUMAR G MAJOR R/AT 942, 3RD CROSS, ITI LAYOUT, NAGARABHAVI, 2ND STAGE, BANGALORE – 560072 6. LAKSHMINARAYANA N V MAJOR FATHER NAME NOT KNOWN R/AT NO.214, 6TH CROSS, MARUTHINAGARA MAHADESHWARANAGARA MAIN ROAD NEAR HEROHALLI CROSS BANGALORE – 560091 7. DR ARUN KUMAR G MAJOR FATHER NAME NOT KNOWN R/AT NO.117, KEERTHANA 5TH MAIN, 5TH CROSS DOORASAMPARKANAGARA LAYOUT - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:3489 WP No. 22742 of 2022 TAVAREKERE KENGERI ROAD KURUBARAHALLI VILLAGE BANGALORE SOUTH TALUK BANGALORE – 562130 …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. MANJUNATH K., HCGP FOR R1 TO R4 SRI. RAVI KUMAR G, R5, IS PARTY-IN-PERSON SRI. LAKSHMINARAYANA N.V-R6 IS PARTY-IN-PERSON SRI. ARUN KUMAR G, R7 IS PARTY-IN-PERSON) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO DIRECT TO THE EFFECT THAT THE PETITIONER INSTITUTION IS ENTITLED TO RECOVER THE ARREARS OF FEES PAYABLE BY ITS STUDENTS INCLUDING THE PARENTS OF THE STUDENTS I.E., R-5 TO 7 AS OF RIGHT BY VIRTUE OF THE PROVISIONS CONTAINED UNDER SECTION 48 OF THE EDUCATION ACT, 1983 AS AMENDED SUBJECT TO THE CONDITIONS IMPOSED BY THE HONBLE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA VIDE ORDER DTD 16.09.2021 IN W.P.NO.4818/2021 (EDN-RES) AND OTHER CONNECTED CASES VIDE ANNX-C AND ETC. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING IN ‘B’ GROUP , THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK S.KINAGI - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:3489 WP No. 22742 of 2022 ORAL ORDER 1. The petitioner has filed this writ petition seeking following reliefs: (I) direct to the effect that the petitioner institution is entitled to recover the arrears of fees payable by its students including the parents of the students i.e., respondent Nos.5 to 7 as of right by virtue of the provisions contained under Section 48 of the Education Act, 1983 as amended subject to the conditions imposed by the Hon’ble High Court of Karnataka vide order dated 16.09.2021 in W.P. No.4818 of 2021 (Edn-Res) and other connected cases vide Annexure ‘C’ . (II) direct to the effect that respondent No.1 Authority having concluded that the grievance sought to be raised by respondent Nos.5 to 7 herein is not maintainable in terms of the provisions contained Sub-rule(4) of Rule 16 of the Karnataka Educational Institutions (Classification, Regulation and Prescription of Curricula Etc.) - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:3489 WP No. 22742 of 2022 Rules 1995 (for short, “KEI CRAPC” Rules, 1995), has absolutely no authority much less jurisdiction to pass resolutions dated 16.12.2021 under Subject No.5 vide Annexure ‘A’ in respect of the fee structure of the petitioner Institution and consequently, directing respondent Nos.2 and 3 means of Memorandum dated 22.04.2022 bearing No.Anu-1 / Pra.Shi / Dera.Petition-01 / 03 / 2022- 23 / 923 issued by respondent No.2 vide Annexure “B” by calling upon the petitioner Institution to comply with the certain formalities in that regard in total ignorance of the larger issue seized of in W.P. Nos.6185-89/2019 including the general interim order dated 07.02.2019 passed this Hon’ble Court vis-à-vis the very applicability of the relevant Act and Rules to the educational institutions like the petitioner affiliated to the Central Boards. (III) Further, consequentially direct that respondent Nos.2 and 3 are not empowered to direct the petitioner - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:3489 WP No. 22742 of 2022 Institution to receive the fees voluntarily tendered by respondent Nos.5 to 7 or other parents by means of cheques and quantifying the amounts so tendered by them as temporary sum and consequently issuing an imaginary warning to the petitioner institution by assuming that the petitioner institution may trouble or harass the students for the alleged non-payment of fees as more fully evidenced in the memorandum bearing No.Anu-1 / Pra.Shi / Dera.Petition-01 / 03 / 2022-23 / 923 issued by respondent No.2 dated 22.04.2022 vide Annexure ‘B’ and consequently quashing the said Annexure ‘B’.” 2. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that in view of the order passed by a Co-ordinate Bench of this Court in the case of Rashmi Education Trust others vs. The State of Karnataka and others1 wherein this Court declared Sections 2(11-A), 5-A, 1 W.P. No.6313 of 2017(Edn) and connected cases, disposed of on 05.01.2023 - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:3489 WP No. 22742 of 2022 48 and 124-A of the Karnataka Education Act, 1983, are contrary to Article 14 of the Constitution of India and are held to be unconstitutional insofar as the private unaided educational institutions. He also submits that the petitioner has filed a suit for recovery of money against the students. 3. In view of the order passed by the Co-ordinate Bench of this Court in the case of Rashmi Education Trust referred supra, this writ petition does not survive for consideration. 4. Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of as having rendered infructuous. Sd/- (ASHOK S.KINAGI) JUDGE RK CT:KHV List No.: 1 Sl No.: 24