- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC-D:531 WP No. 81292 of 2013 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, AT DHARWAD DATED THIS THE 19TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MRS JUSTICE K.S.HEMALEKHA WRIT PETITION NO. 81292 OF 2013 (S-PRO) BETWEEN: SOMASHEKARA SON OF SANGAPPA JIDAGI, AGE ABOUT 70 YEARS, OCC: NIL, R/O: KOULPET, BAGALKOT. … PETITIONER (BY SRI. ANANT P. SAVADI AND SMT. SAROJA BANAKAR, ADVOCATES) AND: 1. THE MANAGEMENT OF BASAVESHWARA VIDHYA VARDHAKA SANGHA BAGALKOT, AT: BAGALKOT, BY CHAIRMAN, BAGALKOT. 2. THE PRINCIPAL STATE COMPOSITE PRE-UNIVERSITY COLLEGE, RAMDURGA DISTRICT, BELGAUM. 3. THE COMMISSIONER PUBLIC INSTRUCTIONS, DHARWAD. 4. THE DIRECTOR PUBLIC INSTRUCTIONS DHARWAD AND APPELLATE AUTHORITY, COMMISSIONER OFFICE, DHARWAD. … RESPONDENTS (NOTICE ISSUED TO R1-R4 ARE SERVED) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO ISSUE A ORDER IN THE NATURE OF A WRIT OF CERTIORARI OR ANY OTHER ORDER IN THE NATURE QUASHING THE ANNEXURE-B ISSUED BY DIRECTOR PUBLIC INSTRUCTIONS, DHARWAD PRODUCED AT ANNEXURE-B DATED 22.01.2013; ISSUE NECESSARY DIRECTION TO RESPONDENT NO.3 AND 4 TO CONSIDER THE CASE OF THE SENIORITY OF THE PETITIONER UNDER SECTION 130 OF EDUCATION ACT AND TO EXTEND MONETARY BENEFITS OF SENIORITY TO THE PETITIONER TO MEET ENDS OF JUSTICE AND ETC. MANJANNA E Digitally signed by MANJANNA E Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA DHARWAD BENCH Date: 2026.02.04 10:28:05 +0530 - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC-D:531 WP No. 81292 of 2013 THIS PETITION IS COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING IN ‘B’ GROUP, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: THE HON'BLE MRS JUSTICE K.S.HEMALEKHA ORAL ORDER The petitioner has called in question the order issued by the Director Public Instructions, Dharwad [Annexure-B] dated 22.01.2013, whereby, the claim of the petitioner for consideration of promotion and extension of monetary benefits came to be rejected on the ground that the petitioner had already been dismissed from service. 2. Learned Additional Government Advocate for respondents-State submits that the petitioner was dismissed from service by an order dated 29.12.2001, which has admittedly not been challenged. It is submitted that once the order of dismissal has attained finality, the question of considering the petitioner for promotion or for extending any monitory benefit does not arise and therefore, the impugned order passed by respondent No.4 does not call for any interference. - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC-D:531 WP No. 81292 of 2013 3. It is also noticed that there has been no representation on behalf of the petitioner. Earlier on 13.01.2026, this Court had recorded the absence of the petitioner as under; “No representation for the petitioner. List this matter on 19.01.2026. In the event, he does not appear on the next date of hearing, the petition would be dismissed for non-prosecution.” 4. Even today, there being no representation for the petitioner, it appears that petitioner is not interested in prosecuting the petition. This Court has no other option than to dismiss the petition for non-prosecution. Accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed for non- prosecution. Sd/- JUSTICE K.S.HEMALEKHA PJ/ CT:BCK LIST NO.: 1 SL NO.: 53