Karnataka High Court
Mr. Y. Ramakrishna Patro vs The Karnataka State Open University on 1 April, 2026
-1-
NC: 2026:KHC:17872
WP No. 9867 of 2026
HC-KAR
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 1ST DAY OF APRIL, 2026
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE E.S.INDIRESH
WRIT PETITION NO.9867 OF 2026 (EDN-RES)
BETWEEN:
1. MR. Y. RAMAKRISHNA PATRO
AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS,
RESIDENT AT NO.C-62, BLOCK-4,
JAGRUTIVIHAR, MCL, BURLA,
SAMBALPUR DISTRICT, ODISHA,
INDIA-768020.
...PETITIONER
(BY SRI. SURYA S., ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. THE KARNATAKA STATE OPEN UNIVERSITY
STATE OPEN UNIVERSITY,
AT MUKTHA GANGOTHRI,
Digitally signed MYSURU, KARNATAKA 570006
by CHAYA S A
Location: HIGH REPRESENTED BY ITS REGISTRAR.
COURT OF
KARNATAKA
2. UNIVERSITY GRANTS COMMISSION,
AT BAHADUR SAFAR MARG,
NEW DELHI,
INDIA-110002
REPRESENTED BY ITS
SECRETARY.
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. RAJENDRA KUMAR SUNGAY, ADVOCATE FOR R1;
R2 NOTICE IS DISPENSED WITH)
-2-
NC: 2026:KHC:17872
WP No. 9867 of 2026
HC-KAR
THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226
AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO
DIRECT THE RESPONDENTS TO CONSIDER THE
REPRESENTATION OF PETITIONER ATTACHED HEREWITH AS
ANNEXURE-P. VIDE 02-03-2026; AND ETC.
THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY
HEARING, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE E.S.INDIRESH
ORAL ORDER
Learned counsel Sri. Rajendra Kumar Sungay, appears for Respondent No.1. Notice to Respondent No.2 is dispensed with.
2. Heard the learned counsel appearing for the parties.
3. In this writ petition, the petitioner has sought for direction to respondents to consider the representation dated 02.03.2026 made by the petitioner produced at Annexure-P. -3- NC: 2026:KHC:17872 WP No. 9867 of 2026 HC-KAR
4. Having regard to the submissions made by the learned counsel appearing for the parties, Respondent No.1 is directed to consider the representation dated 02.03.2026 (Annexure-P) submitted to Respondent No.1-University within an outer limit of two months from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order. Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of.
It is made clear that this Court has not expressed any opinion on the merits of the case.
SD/-
(E.S.INDIRESH) JUDGE SB List No.: 1 Sl No.: 22