[Cites 3, Cited by 0]
Karnataka High Court
Ms. Abhignashree L vs The State Of Karnataka on 13 February, 2026
-1-
NC: 2026:KHC:9033-DB
WP No.36279 of 2025
HC-KAR
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 13TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2026
PRESENT
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JAYANT BANERJI
AND
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE T.M.NADAF
WRIT PETITION NO. 36279 OF 2025 (EDN-RES)
BETWEEN:
MS.ABHIGNASHREE L
D/O LOKESH. V
AGED ABOUT 24 YEARS
STUDENT OF 3RD YEAR MBBS COURSE
DR.B.R.AMBEDKAR MEDICAL COLLEGE
K.G.HALLI, BENGALURU-560 045
R/AT NO.104, CHANDAN APRTS.
ANNAPURANESHWARA NAGAR
NAGARBHAVI, BENGALURU-560 091
...PETITIONER
(BY SMT.JAHNAVI MANJUNATH, ADVOCATE FOR
SRI CHANDRAKANTH R GOULAY, ADVOCATE)
AND:
Digitally 1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA
signed by K G
RENUKAMBA DEPARTMENT OF MEDICAL EDUCATION
Location:
M.S.BUILDINGS, BENGALURU-560 001
HIGH COURT
OF 2. NATIONAL MEDICAL COMMISSION
KARNATAKA (ERSTWHILE MEDICAL COUNCIL OF INDIA)
POCKET 14, SECTOR 8
DWARKA, NEW DELHI-110 007
REP. BY ITS SECRETARY
3. THE DIRECTORATE OF MEDICAL EDUCATION
REPRESENTED BY ITS DIRECTOR
I FLOOR, FORT, K R ROAD
BENGALURU-560 002
4. THE KARNATAKA EXAMINATIONS AUTHORITY
SAMPIGE ROAD, 18TH CROSS
-2-
NC: 2026:KHC:9033-DB
WP No.36279 of 2025
HC-KAR
MALLESHWARAM, BANGALORE-560 012
REP. BY ITS EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR
5. G.R.MEDICAL COLLEGE HOSPITAL
AND RESEARCH CENTRE
PADU, VIA PADUMALE, NEERUMARGA
MANGALORE-575 029
REP.BY DEAN & DIRECTOR SRI GANESH RAO
6. G R EDUCATION TRUST
NEERMARGA, NEER MARGA
MANGALORE -575 029
REP. ITS AUTHORISED OFFICER
7. THE CHAIRMAN
FEE REGULATORY COMMITTEE
KARNATAKA EXAMINATIONS AUTHORITY
SAMPIGE ROAD, 18TH CROSS
MALLESHWARAM, BANGALORE - 560 012
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SMT.MAMATHA SHETTY, AGA FOR R1;
SRI N.K.RAMESH, ADVOCATE FOR R4 & R7,
SRI VIKRAM UNNI RAJGOPAL, ADVOCATE FOR R5 & R6;
R2 & R3 SERVED & UNREPRESENTED)
THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227
OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO (A) ISSUE A WRIT OF
MANDAMUS DIRECTING THE 5TH RESPONDENT TO REFUND THE
UNLAWFUL EXCESS AMOUNT COLLECTED FROM THE PETITIONER
TOTALLING RS.25,03,950/- (ANNEXURE-A) WITH INTEREST AT 12%
P.A. ETC.
THIS WRIT PETITION COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING
IN 'B' GROUP, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JAYANT BANERJI
and
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE T.M.NADAF
-3-
NC: 2026:KHC:9033-DB
WP No.36279 of 2025
HC-KAR
ORAL ORDER
(PER: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JAYANT BANERJI)
This petition has been filed seeking the following reliefs:
(a) Issue a writ of mandamus directing the 5th
Respondent to refund the unlawful excess
amount collected from the petitioner totalling
Rs.25,03,950/- (Annexure-A) with interest at
12 percent per annum;
(b) Issue a direction to the Respondents-1 to 4 to
ensure, facilitate to refund from the 5th
Respondent, in light of similar common
judgment dated 11/08/2025 passed by this
Hon'ble Court in W.P.No.10871/2024 and other
connected cases;
(c) Issue a writ of mandamus in the nature of
directing the Fee Regulation Committee to
decide FRC No.8/2025 as early as possible;
(d) Pass such other order or reliefs as this Hon'ble
Court may deem fit, including costs of the
petition.
NC: 2026:KHC:9033-DB
HC-KAR
2. It is submitted by learned Counsel for the petitioner
that for the very same relief sought in prayer No.(a) an
application has been made to the Fee Regulatory Committee
constituted under Section 6 of the Karnataka Professional
Education Institutions (Regulation of Admission and
Determination of Fee) Act, 2006.
3. Sri N.K.Ramesh, learned Counsel appearing for the
Committee states that the matter is pending consideration
before the Committee. Learned Counsel for respondent
No.6/Trust, also states that the cross examination of the
petitioner has taken place in part before the Fee Regulatory
Committee.
4. In view of the aforesaid, we find no reason to
interfere in this petition as the petitioner is already availing the
statutory remedy provided under the aforesaid Act of 2006. For
the reason aforesaid, this petition is dismissed.
5. Though the learned Counsel for the petitioner prays
for direction for early disposal of the case, however, nothing
has been demonstrated by the learned Counsel for the
NC: 2026:KHC:9033-DB
HC-KAR
petitioner who appears online, that unnecessary delay is being
caused by the Fee Regulatory Committee in deciding her case.
6. Be that as it may, the Committee may endeavour to
decide the matter without granting any unnecessary
adjournment to any of the parties.
Sd/-
(JAYANT BANERJI)
JUDGE
Sd/-
(T.M.NADAF)
JUDGE
KSR
List No.: 1 Sl No.: 8
