- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:4617-DB WA No. 1845 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 28TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2026 PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE D K SINGH AND THE HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE TARA VITASTA GANJU WRIT APPEAL NO.1845 OF 2025 (S-RES) BETWEEN: SRI. D. S. PRATHAP S/O SUBBANNA. D, AGED ABOUT 30 YEARS, R/AT DEVANURU VILLAGE, NANJANAGUDU TALUK, MYSORE DISTRICT – 571 119. …APPELLANT (BY SRI. SRINIVAS V., ADVOCATE) AND: 1. STATE OF KARNATAKA REPRESENTED BY, ITS ADDITIONAL CHIEF SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF HIGHER EDUCATION (TECHNICAL), VIDHANA SOUDHA, BANGALORE - 560 001. 2. THE COMMISSIONER DEPARTMENT OF HIGHER EDUCATION (COLLEGLATE AND TECHNICAL EDUCATION) PLACE ROAD, BENGALURU – 560 001. 3. UNDER SECRETARY DEPARTMENT OF HIGHER EDUCATION (TECHNICAL EDUCATION) - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:4617-DB WA No. 1845 of 2025 GOVERNMENT OF KARNATAKA BENGALURU – 560 001. 4. THE SECRETARY SREE GURU MALLESHWARA MAHAVIDYALAYA SAMSTE (POLYTECHNIC), DEVANOOR, NANJANAGUDU TALUK, MYSORE DISTRICT. 5. THE PRINCIPAL SREE GURU MALLESHWARA MAHAVIDYALAYA SAMSTE (POLYTECHNIC), DEVANOOR, NANJANAGUDU TALUK, MYSORE DISTRICT - 571 314. 6. SATHISHA K. S. S/O SHIVANANJAPPA, MAJOR, R/AT KANANURU VILLAGE, HULLAHALLI HOBLI, NANJANAGUDU TALUK, MYSORE DISTRICT – 571 314. 7. MANAGING DIRECTOR CHECKMATE ASSET SERVICES PVT. LTD., OFFICE AT NO.1128, 13TH CROSS, 4TH MAIN, 1ST STAGE, VIJAYANAGAR, MYSURU – 570 017. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. M.N.SUDEV HEGDE., AGA FOR R1 TO R3; SRI. THYAGARAJA, ADVOCATE FOR R4 & R5; SRI. RAGHAVENDRA M, ADVOCATE FOR R6; R7 - SERVED) *** THIS WRIT APPEAL IS FILED UNDER SECTION 4 OF THE KARNATAKA HIGH COURT ACT, PRAYING TO ALLOW THIS APPEAL AND SET ASIDE THE ORDER PASSED BY THE LEARNED SINGLE JUDGE IN WRIT PETITION NO.1598/2025 VIDE ORDER - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:4617-DB WA No. 1845 of 2025 DATED 24/10/2025 AND CONSEQUENTLY ALLOW THE WRIT PETITION FILED BY THE APPELLANT, ETC. THIS WRIT APPEAL COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE D K SINGH and HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE TARA VITASTA GANJU ORAL JUDGMENT (PER: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE D K SINGH) 1. The present intra-Court appeal has been filed impugning the order dated 24.10.2025 passed by the learned Single Judge in Writ Petition No.1598/2025(S-RES) filed by the appellant. 2. The parties are referred to as per their ranking before the Writ Court for the sake of convenience. 3. The petitioner was working as a Mechanic in the fourth/fifth respondent ‘Sree Guru Malleshwara Mahavidyalaya Samste (Polytechnic)’. The said College was taken in Grant-in- Aid on 07.02.2024. The petitioner's name did not appear in Grant-in-Aid as one of the employee, for which the Grant-in-Aid was granted by the Government. - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:4617-DB WA No. 1845 of 2025 4. The petitioner filed the writ petition alleging that Sathisha K.S.(sixth respondent), whose name has been approved in the Grant-in-Aid for the post of ‘Mechanic’ had never worked in the fourth/fifth respondent - Institution. His submission is that the petitioner’s name was wrongly omitted and the sixth respondent’s name was incorrectly included in the Grant-in-Aid. Therefore, he filed the writ petition, seeking a writ for quashing of the order dated 13.11.2024. His submission is that the sixth respondent, Sathisha K.S., was working as a ‘Team Leader’ in seventh respondent, Checkmate Asset Services Pvt.Ltd. and not in the fifth respondent, Institution, and therefore, his name ought not have been included in the Grant-in-Aid, but the petitioner’s name should have been included in the Grant-in-Aid against the post of ‘Mechanic’. 5. His submission is that the Management of the fifth respondent Institution filed incorrect and false particulars of the sixth respondent. On the basis of the said wrong, incorrect and false information, the sixth respondent’s name was approved in Grant-in-Aid. - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:4617-DB WA No. 1845 of 2025 6. The learned Single Judge, however, having considered the submissions, has dismissed the writ petition, considering the fact that the petitioner was working as a ‘Mechanic’ in Mechanical Department in the fourth/fifth respondent Institution [from 06.10.2017 on contract basis] whereas the sixth respondent was also working as Mechanic in Mechanical Department prior to him i.e. from 16.02.2016, and thus, the sixth respondent was senior to the petitioner, and therefore, his name was included in the Grant-in-Aid. 7. The learned counsel for the appellant/petitioner submits that the sixth respondent, in fact, never worked in the fourth/fifth respondent, Institution. 8. Be that as it may, these are the disputed questions of fact and the competent authority must examine these facts. Therefore, we permit the petitioner/appellant to make a proper representation with all relevant documents to the Commissioner, Department of Higher Education, who should examine the representation and decide the same after issuing notice to the fifth and sixth respondents. The parties should be given opportunity of hearing. If such a representation is filed - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:4617-DB WA No. 1845 of 2025 within a period of three weeks from today, the Commissioner should pass a reasoned and speaking order, as directed above, within a period of eight weeks thereafter. 9. Accordingly, the Writ Appeal stands disposed of. (D K SINGH) JUDGE (TARA VITASTA GANJU) JUDGE BMV* List No.: 1 Sl No.: 22 Digitally signed by DINESH KUMAR SINGH Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNTAKA Digitally signed by TARA VITASTA GANJU Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNTAKA