Sri. H T Anneshi v. The State of Karnataka

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 20TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE H.T. NARENDRA PRASAD WRIT PETITION NO. 18562 OF 2025 (S-RES) C/W WRIT PETITION NO. 13899 OF 2025 (S-RES)

IN WP NO. 18562/2025 BETWEEN: SRI. H T ANNESHI S/O H D THIPPESWAMY AGED ABOUT 56 YEARS WORKING AS LECTURER IN ECONOMICS SRI RANGANATHA SWAMY PU COLLEGE JANUKONDA, CHITRADURGA TALUK & DISTRICT. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. PADMANABHA.R., ADVOCATE) AND:

¶1THE STATE OF KARNATAKA REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY DEPARTMENT OF SCHOOL EDUCATION & LITERACY M S BUILDING, DR. AMBEDKAR VEEDHI BENGALURU 560 001.

¶2THE DIRECTOR DEPARTMENT OF SCHOOL EDUCATION AND LITERACY(PRE UNIVERISTY) 18TH CROSS MALLESHWARAM BENGALURU 560 003.

Location: HIGH COURTOF KARNATAKA NC:(2026:KHC:2927( WP(No.(18562(of(2025( C/W(WP(No.(13899(of(2025( , ,,HC-KAR( ( (

3., THE,DEPUTY,DIRECTOR, DEPARTMENT,OF,SCHOOL,EDUCATION,, AND,LITERACY,(PRE,-UNIVERSITY,), CHITRADURGA,577501., ,

4., THE,PRESIDENT, VALMIKI,EDUCATION,SOCIETY,(R), KARUVINAKATTE,CIRCLE, CHITRADURGA,577501., ,

5., THE,SECRETARY, VALMIKI,EDUCATION,SOCIETY,(R), KARUVINAKATTE,CIRCLE, CHITRADURGA,577501., ,

6., THE,PRINCIPAL, SRI,RANGANATHASWAMY,PU,COLLEGE, JANUKONDA,VILLAGE, PANDARAHALLI,POST, CHITRADURGA,TALUK, AND,DISTRICT,577555., …RESPONDENTS, (BY,SMT.,ANITHA,N.,,AGA,FOR,R1,TO,R3:, SRI.,A,C,BALRAJ,,ADVOCATE,FOR,R4&,R5, R6,IS,SERVED), , , THIS,WRIT,PETITION,IS,FILED,UNDER,ARTICLES,226, AND,227,OF,THE,CONSTITUTION,OF,INDIA,PRAYING,TO, ISSUE,A,WRIT,IN,THE,NATURE,OF,CERTIORARI,TO,QUASH, THE, IMPUGNED, ORDER, DATED, 12.03.2025, PASSED, BY, THE, 2ND,RESPONDENT, IN, THE,APPEAL,NO.2/2023, VIDE, ANNEXURE-F, AND, ALSO, QUASH, THE, ORDER, OF, SUSPENSION,BEARING,NO.VA,VI,SA.,14/2023-24,DATED, NC:(2026:KHC:2927( WP(No.(18562(of(2025( C/W(WP(No.(13899(of(2025( , ,,HC-KAR( ( (

10.07.2023,PASSED,BY,THE,4TH,AND,5TH,RESPONDENT, MANAGEMENT,VIDE,ANNEXURE-D,AND,ETC., , IN(WP(NO.(13899/2025, BETWEEN:,

1., VALMIKI,EDUCATION,SOCIETY,(R), KARUVINAKATTE,CIRCLE, CHITRADURGA-577501, REP.,BY,ITS,PRESIDENT, SRI.,THIPPESWAMY, S/O.,KATTAIAH, AGED,ABOUT,45,YEARS., ,

2., VALMIKI,EDUCATION,SOCIETY,(R), KARUVINAKATTE,CIRCLE, CHITRADURGA-577501, REP.,BY,ITS,SECRETARY, SRI.S.SANDEEP, S/O.SURA,NAYAK, AGED,ABOUT,40YEARS., ,

3., THE,PRINCIPAL,, SRI.,RANGANATHASWAMY,, PRE-UNIVERSITY,COLLEGE, JAANAKONDA,,CHITRADURGA,TALUK, CHITRADURGA,DISTRICT-577555., ...PETITIONERS, (BY,SRI.,A,C,BALARAJ.,,ADVOCATE), AND:,

1., THE,DIRECTOR, OFFICE,OF,THE,DIRECTOR, SCHOOL,EDUCATION,DEPARTMENT, NC:(2026:KHC:2927( WP(No.(18562(of(2025( C/W(WP(No.(13899(of(2025( , ,,HC-KAR( ( ( (PRE-UNIVERSITY),,18TH,CROSS,ROAD, MALLESWARAM,,BENGALURU-560,012., ,

2., THE,DEPUTY,DIRECTOR,, EDUCATION,DEPARTMENT, (PRE-UNIVERSITY),,, CHIRTRADURGA,DISTRICT, CHITRADURGA-577501., ,

3., SRI.H.T.ANNESHRI,, MAJOR,,LECTURER,IN,ECONOMICS, SRI.,RANGANATHASWAMY,, PRE-UNIVERSITY,COLLEGE,, JANUKONDA,,CHITRADURGA,TALUK, CHITRADURGA,DISTRICT-577535., ...RESPONDENTS, (BY,SMT.,ANITHA,N,,AGA,FOR,R1,&,R2:, SRI,PADMANABHA,R,,ADVOCATE,FOR,R3), ,,,,,,, ,THIS, WRIT, PETITION, IS, FILED, , UNDER, ARTICLES, 226,AND,227,OF,THE,CONSTITUTION,OF,INDIA,PRAYING, TO, QUASH, THE, IMPUGNED, ORDER, BEARING, APPEAL, NO.2/2023, DATED:, 12.3.2025, PASSED, BY, THE, 1ST, RESPONDENT,VIDE,ANNEXURE-T,AND,ETC., , THESE, PETITIONS,, COMING, ON, FOR, PRELIMINARY, HEARING,, THIS, DAY,, ORDER, WAS, MADE, THEREIN, AS, UNDER:, CORAM:, HON'BLE,MR.,JUSTICE,H.T.,NARENDRA,PRASAD, , (

ORAL ORDER

¶1In these two writ petitions, petitioners have called in question the order dated 12.03.2025 passed by the Director, Department of School Education and Literacy (Pre University), in Appeal No.2/2023.

¶2For convenience, the parties in this order are referred to as per ranking in W.P.No.18562/2025.

¶3Brief facts of the case are that Mr.H.T.Anneshi (petitioner in W.P.No.18562/2`025) was appointed on

31.05.2007 as a Lecturer in Economics by the respondent Nos.4 and 5-Management i.e., Valmiki Education Society (R). Thereafter, he was posted to work at respondent No.6-College i.e., Sri Ranganathaswamy PU College, Janukunda Village, Pandarahalli Post, Chitradurga. Thereafter, his appointment was admitted to salary grant by Government Order dated 06.07.2009. When he was working as a Lecturer in respondent No.6-College, the Management by order dated 10.07.2023 (Annexure-D) has kept the petitioner under suspension. Being aggrieved by

the said order, the petitioner in W.P.No.18562/2025 filed an appeal before the respondent No.2 under Section 130 of the Karnataka Education Act, 1983 (for short 'the Act') with a prayer to direct the Management to continue the petitioner in service and to pay salary. The respondent No.2 by impugned order dated 12.03.2025 (Annexure-F) has directed the Management to pay subsistence allowance to the petitioner. Being aggrieved by the said order dated

12.03.2025, Management i.e., Valmiki Education Society has filed W.P.No.13899/2025 and Sri.H.T.Anneshi has filed W.P.No.18562/2025.

¶4Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner in W.P.No.18562/2025 has submitted that the Management has kept the petitioner under suspension by order dated

10.07.2023. Neither they have completed the enquiry nor paid any subsistence allowance. The suspension order is passed contrary to the provisions of the Act. Therefore, he has approached the authority by filing an appeal challenging the suspension order.

¶5Mr.A.C.Balraj, learned counsel appearing for the Management has contented that the suspension order dated 10.07.2023 is passed by the Management vide Annexure-D. Challenging the said order, the petitioner has filed an appeal before the respondent No.2 under Section 130 of the Act. Remedy of appeal under Section 130 of the Act is not available to the petitioner and the petitioner has to file a revision under Section 131 of the Act. Therefore, the impugned order dated 12.03.2025 passed by the respondent No.2 on the appeal filed by the petitioner under Section 130 of the Act, is without jurisdiction. In support of his contention, he has also relied on the decision of this Court in W.P.No.39904/2002, disposed of on 18.02.2003.

¶6Learned Government Advocate appearing for the State has not disputed the said legal position.

¶7Heard the learned counsel for the parties. Perused the writ papers.

¶8When the petitioner was working as a Lecturer in respondent No.6-College, the Management by order dated

10.07.2023 has kept him under suspension. Being aggrieved by the same, the petitioner has filed an appeal before respondent No.2 under Section 130 of the Act.

¶9Under Section 130 of the Act, any person or Governing Council, aggrieved by an order passed by an officer or authority under this Act may within the prescribed period prefer an appeal to the prescribed appellate authority.

¶10However, in the case on hand, the Order under challenge before the respondent No.2 is the suspension order passed by that Management. Therefore, the appeal filed by the petitioner before the respondent No.2 under Section 130 of the Act is not maintainable. This aspect has been considered by this Court in W.P.No.39904/2002. The relevant paragraphs 5 and 6 of the said order is extracted hereinbelow:

"5. In order to appreciate the rival contentions, Sec.130 of the Karnataka Education Act, 1983, which is the section under which the Appellate Authority has purported to have exercised the power is extracted herein for ready reference.

Appeals: Save as otherwise provided in this Governing Council, Act, any or person aggrieved by an order passed by an Officer of Authority under this Act may within the prescribed period prefer an appeal to the prescribed Appellate Authority."

¶6An analysis of Sec.130 indicates that if an grder is passed by an 'officer' meaning an officer of the State Government who is empowered to exercise the powers under the provisions of this Act, or an 'Authority' meaning a statutory authority within, the meaning the Education Act any person an Officer or aggrieved by the orders of such Authority can file an appeal. Admittedly, in the facts of the present case, the order is passed by the petitioner who is a Private Educational Trust. The petitioner cannot be equated to an Officer or an Authority within the meaning of the two expressions stated in sec.130 of the Act. Therefore, the appeal filed by the first respondent against the orders of the private body to the Commissioner is not maintainable under Sec. 130 of the Education Act. No other provisions of the Act has been brought to the notice of this court by the counsel for the State and the first respondent authorizing the Commissioner to entertain an appeal against the orders passed by the Managing Committee of an Educational Institution. On an interpretation of Sec.130, it is clear that the Appellate Authority

has no jurisdiction to entertain the appeal against the order of a private Body."

¶11In view of the above, the impugned order dated

12.03.2025 passed by the respondent No.2 at Annexure-F is without jurisdiction. Hence, the impugned order is liable to be quashed.

¶12Accordingly, the following order is passed: ORDER a) Writ petitions are allowed. b) The impugned order dated 12.03.2025 passed by the Director, Department of School Education and Literacy (Pre University), Bengaluru, (Annexure-F in W.P.No.18562/2025 and Annexure-T in W.P.No.13899/2025), is hereby quashed. c) The Director, Department of School Education and Literacy (Pre University), Bengaluru, is directed to transfer the Appeal No.2/2023 filed by the

petitioner (petitioner in W.P.No.18562/2025) to respondent No.1-State Government. d) Thereafter, the State Government is directed to treat the appeal as revision filed under Section 131 of the Act and consider the same and pass appropriate orders in accordance with law, after giving an opportunity to all the parties, within a period of six months from the date of receipt of copy of this order.

Sd/- (H.T. NARENDRA PRASAD) JUDGE

DM LIST NO.: 1 SL NO.: 24