Sri Srinivasa Education v. Government of Karnataka

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 10TH DAY OF MARCH, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE E.S.INDIRESH WRIT PETITION NO.30074 OF 2025 (EDN-AD) BETWEEN:

¶1SRI. SRINIVASA EDUCATION AND RURAL DEVELOPMENT SOCIETY (S.C.)(R) BEHIND VOKKALIGARA HOSTEL 2ND CROSS, SRI SIMHADRI NILAYA C K PURA, CHITRADURGA TOWN AND DISTRICT - 577501 (A SOCIETY REGSITERED UNDER KARNATAKA SOCIETEIS REGISTRATION ACT, 1960) REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY SRI. B. M. PAWAN. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. K. RAMA BHAT, ADVOCATE) AND:

¶1GOVERNMENT OF KARNATAKA DIRECTOR OF MEDICAL EDUCATION BMC AND RI CAMPUS K R ROAD BENGALURU 560 002 REP BY ITS MEMBER SECRETARY.

¶2THE SPECIAL OFFICER KARNATAKA NURSING AND PARA MEDICAL SCIENCES EDUCATION (REGULATION ) AUTHORITY

Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA NC:(2026:KHC:14226( WP(No.(30074(of(2025( ( , ,,HC-KAR( ( ( PARA,MEDICAL,BOARD, NO.,40/20A, LAKSHMI,COMPLEX,1ST,FLOOR, OPP.,VANI,VILAS,HOSPITAL, BENGALURU,560,002., ,

3., SRI.,B.T.,MALLAIAH, S/O,LATE,THIPPAIAH, AGED,ABOUT,73,YEARS, R/AT,C,K,PURA,TOWN,,, CHITRADURGA,TOWN,,, AND,DISTRICT,-,577501., …RESPONDENTS, (BY,SMT.,SUKANYA,BALIGA,B.,,AGA,FOR,R1;, SMT.,NEHA,VENKATESH,,ADVOCATE,FOR, SRI.,S.,SUDARSHANA,,ADVOCATE,FOR,R2;, SRI.,SHIVANANDA,,ADVOCATE,FOR,R3), , THIS, WRIT, PETITION, IS, FILED, UNDER, ARTICLES, 226, AND, 227, OF, THE, CONSTITUTION, OF, INDIA, PRAYING, TO,,,, QUASH, THE, ORDER/DIRECTION, NO.PMB/24/2023-24, DATED, ND28-07-2025,,ISSUED,BY,THE,2 ,,RESPONDENT,WITHHOLDING, THE,ADMISSIONS, OF,STUDENTS, FOR,THE,YEAR,2025-26,TO, SRI., MARUTHI, INSTITUTE, OF, PARA, MEDICAL, SCIENCE,, CHITRADURGA, RUN, BY, THE, PETITIONER, AS, ANNEXURE, -, A;, AND,ETC.,, , THIS, PETITION,, COMING, ON, FOR, ORDERS,, THIS, DAY,, ORDER,WAS,MADE,THEREIN,AS,UNDER:, CORAM:, HON'BLE,MR.,JUSTICE,E.S.INDIRESH, , ,

ORAL ORDER In this writ petition, the petitioner is assailing the order dated 28.07.2025 (Annexure-A) issued by respondent No.2, whereby the admissions of students for the Academic Year 2025–26 of the petitioner-Institution has been withheld inter-alia sought for consideration of the representation dated 28.07.2025 produced at Annexure-G.

¶2I have heard Sri. K. Rama Bhat, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner; Smt. Sukanya Baliga, learned Additional Government Advocate for the respondent No.1; Smt. Neha Venkatesh, for Sril. S. Sudharshana, learned counsel appearing for respondent No.2, and Sri. Shivarudra, learned counsel appearing for the respondent No.3.

¶3Sri.K. Rama Bhat, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, submits that the petitioner-Society

is registered under the provisions of the Karnataka Societies Registration Act, 1960, and that the Society is running Sri Maruthi Institute of Paramedical Sciences at Chitradurga (for short, Institution). The certificate of affiliation is produced at Annexure-E to the writ petition for the Academic Year 2024–25. It is further submitted that the petitioner-Society has admitted 18 students as per the list produced at Annexure-F to the writ petition.

¶4It is the grievance of the petitioner-Society that respondent No.2 has issued the notice at Annexure-A withholding the admissions temporarily at the behest of a letter addressed by the President of the petitioner-Society. Therefore, it is contended that the action taken by respondent No.2 requires interference by this Court insofar as withholding the admissions of students for the Academic Year 2025–

26 is concerned. Accordingly, it is contended that the impugned notice issued by respondent No.2 is liable to be interfered with in this petition. .

¶5Sri. Shivarudra, learned counsel appearing for respondent No.3, contended that the petitioner-Society has not renewed its registration for a period of two to three years and therefore, the locus-standi of the petitioner suffers under the provisions of the Karnataka Societies Registration Act, 1960. In the absence of such renewal, the petitioner-Society is incapable of running the Institution. On that ground, he sought for dismissal of the writ petition. It is further contended that the dispute involved is essentially between the members of the managing committee of the petitioner-Society, and therefore the same has to be resolved before the competent Civil

Court. Hence, he sought for dismissal of the writ petition.

¶6Smt. Neha Venkatesh, learned counsel appearing for respondent No.2 sought to justify the impugned order at Annexure-A and submitted that respondent No.2 has taken a decision to withhold further admissions, as information was received regarding the non-renewal of the registration of the petitioner-Society. Therefore, she sought for dismissal of the writ petition.

¶7Smt. Sukanya Baliga, learned Additional Government Advocate appearing for the respondent-State also sought to justify the impugned notice at Annexure-A.

¶8In light of the submissions made by the learned counsel appearing for the parties, it is not in dispute that the petitioner-Society, represented by its

Secretary, has challenged the order dated 28.07.2025 wherein respondent No.2 has issued a notice informing the petitioner-Society not to make further admissions in their Institution, namely Sri Maruthi Institute of Paramedical Sciences, which is recognized by the respondent-State.

¶9The reason for issuing the notice at Annexure-A is at the instance of respondent No.3, who claims to be the President of the petitioner-Society, informing respondent No.2 about the non-renewal of the registration of the petitioner-Society. It is well settled in law that disputes between members of the managing committee of a Society are required to be resolved before a competent Civil Court.

¶10Taking into consideration the fact that, as per the interim order dated

30.09.2025, the petitioner-Society has admitted 18 students to the

aforementioned Institution. It is also to be noted that the reason for withholding further admissions is on account of the non-renewal of the registration of the petitioner-Society. In that view of the matter, I am of the view that there is no infirmity in the letter dated

28.07.2025 (Annexure-A) issued by respondent No.2.

¶11However, treating the said notice as a show-cause notice, it is open to the petitioner-Institution to submit proof of renewal of registration of the petitioner-Society in due course.

¶12Taking into consideration the interest of the students, the interim order dated 30.09.2025 passed by this Court shall continue till the petitioner furnishes the renewed registration Certificate of the society under the Act to the respondent No.2 within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order.

¶13It is also pertinent to mention that until the consideration of the plea made by the petitioner-Society with regard to renewal of recognition based on the renewed registration of the Society, the petitioner-Society shall not make any further admissions. With these observations, the writ petition stands disposed of.

SD/- (E.S.INDIRESH) JUDGE

SB List No.: 1 Sl No.: 7