[Cites 0, Cited by 0]
Karnataka High Court
The State Of Karnataka vs Shri Annappa Teradal Grameen ... on 5 February, 2026
-1-
NC: 2026:KHC-D:1693-DB
WA No. 100648 of 2025
HC-KAR
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, AT DHARWAD
DATED THIS THE 5TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2026
PRESENT
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.I.ARUN
AND
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE B. MURALIDHARA PAI
WRIT APPEAL NO. 100648 OF 2025 (EDN-RES)
BETWEEN:
1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA,
REPRESENTED BY ITS
PRINCIPLE SECRETARY TO GOVT.,
DEPARTMENT OF SCHOOL EDUCATION
AND LITERACY PRE UNIVERSITY,
VIDHANA SOUDHA, BENGALURU - 560 001.
2. THE DIRECTOR DEPARTMENT OF
SCHOOL EDUCATION,
PRE UNIVERSITY AND LITERACY,
Digitally signed by
VISHAL NINGAPPA 18TH CROSS, MALLESHWARAM,
PATTIHAL
Location: High
BENGALURU - 560 012.
Court of Karnataka,
Dharwad Bench,
Dharwad 3. THE JOINT DIRECTOR,
DEPARTMENT OF SCHOOL EDUCATION
PRE UNIVERSITY AND LITERACY,
18TH CROSS, MALLESHWAEAM,
BENGALURU - 560 012.
4. THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR,
THE OFFICE PF THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF
PRE UNIVERSITY EDUCATION CHIKKODI,
TQ: CHIKKODI, DIST: BELAGAVI - 591 201
... APPELLANTS
(BY SRI. SHARAD V. MAGADUM, AGA)
-2-
NC: 2026:KHC-D:1693-DB
WA No. 100648 of 2025
HC-KAR
AND:
SHRI. ANNAPPA TERADAL GRAMEEN ABHIVRUDDI
SHIKSHANA SANSTHES TERADAL SCIENCE
PU COLLEGE ATHANI,
R/BY ITS SECRETARY
DR. NANDISH S/O. ANNAPPA TERDAL,
AGE: 44 YEARS, OCC: DOCTOR AND
SECRETARY OF SHRI. ANNAPPA TERDAL
GRAMEEN ABHIVRUDDI SHIKSHANA
SANSTHE, ATHANI, R/O: 353, SHIVAGANGA
HOSPITAL, ATHANI, TQ: ATHANI,
DIST: BELAGAVI, KARNATAKA - 591 304.
... RESPONDENT
(BY SRI. MANOJ N. BIKKANNAVAR, ADV.)
THIS WRIT APPEAL IS FILED UNDER SECTION 4 OF
KARNATAKA HIGH COURT ACT, 1961, PRAYING TO, ALLOW THE
WRIT APPEAL AND SET ASIDE THE ORDER DATED 10.09.2025 IN
W.P.NO.106573/2025, PASSED BY THE LEARNED SINGLE JUDGE
IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY AND ETC.,
THIS WRIT APPEAL, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY
HEARING THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS
UNDER:
CORAM: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.I.ARUN
AND
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE B. MURALIDHARA PAI
-3-
NC: 2026:KHC-D:1693-DB
WA No. 100648 of 2025
HC-KAR
ORAL JUDGMENT
(PER: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.I.ARUN)
1. Aggrieved by the interim order dated 10.09.2025
passed in Writ Petition No.106573 of 2025, the respondent-State
therein has preferred the present writ appeal.
2. The respondent-College was granted the necessary
recognition to start a Pre-University College in the year 2019 and
has been functioning since then. However, on 23.05.2025, on
the ground that the respondent-College had obtained the
necessary permission by playing fraud on the authorities
concerned and that there were certain lacunae in the
respondent-College, the recognition granted in its favour was
withdrawn. Notwithstanding the said withdrawal, the respondent-
College admitted 157 students for the academic year 2025-26
subsequent to the order of cancellation. Thereafter, having failed
to obtain a favourable order from the authorities concerned
restoring its recognition, the respondent-College has preferred
Writ petition No.106573 of 2025. The learned Single Judge after
hearing the parties concerned, passed the following interim
order:
NC: 2026:KHC-D:1693-DB
HC-KAR
"i. Respondent Nos.2 to 4 are directed to open the
SATS portal to enable the petitioner to enter the
details of 157 students admitted for the additional 2
courses for which the application dated 30.05.2025
had been made.
ii. The said opening of the SATS portal and the
registration of the students shall be subject to the
result of this writ petition and subject to the result
of the enquiry to be made by respondent No.1.
iii. The SATS portal shall be opened within 4 days from
now, to enable such registration.
iv. The enquiry report to be filed on or before
06.11.2025.
v. Relist on 06.11.2025."
3. Aggrieved by the same, the State has preferred this
writ appeal.
4. The case of the State is that once recognition is
withdrawn from the respondent-College, it is not entitled to
admit students, and if any admission made thereafter is at its
own peril. However, in the course of arguments, learned AGA,
upon instructions, fairly submits that all necessary steps would
be taken to safeguard the interest of the students concerned. He
further submits that the State is ready and willing to shift the
students to a Government College, if required. The grievance of
the State is that once recognition granted to the respondent-
College is withdrawn, it could not have admitted students, and it
NC: 2026:KHC-D:1693-DB
HC-KAR
is not possible for the State to consider them as students of the
respondent-College and conduct examinations in the respondent-
College.
5. Per contra, learned counsel for the respondent-
College submits that it has all necessary infrastructure and that,
by mistake, certain false information was furnished at the time of
obtaining recognition. He submits that, considering the present
infrastructure, the respondent-College ought to be continued
with the recognition granted. It is further submitted that the
appellant-State authorities are unnecessarily harassing the
respondent-College by not conducting the necessary enquiry into
its affairs and delaying by taking decision in respect of the same.
6. Whether the recognition granted to the respondent-
College has been rightly withdrawn or not is the subject matter
of proceedings before the concerned authorities, and whether the
State rightly rejected the request of respondent-College to start
additional sections for Pre-University Course is the subject
matter of the writ petition.
7. Be that as it may, it is important to protect the
interest of the students admitted by the respondent-College, who
NC: 2026:KHC-D:1693-DB
HC-KAR
are not even before this Court. No doubt, the respondent-College
could not have admitted the students without due recognition. If
the recognition is withdrawn, it is entitled to challenge the same
in the manner known to law and should admit students only if
permitted in law to do so. The respondent-College clearly erred
in admitting 157 students for the academic year 2025-26. It is
submitted by the learned counsel for the respondent-College that
the said students have attended classes during the academic
year 2025-26. It is not the case of the State that it intends to
deny the students the opportunity to write the examination for
the first year PUC, said to commence from 10.02.2026. Under
these circumstances, we do not find any error in the interim
order passed by the learned Single Judge, and the same is
hereby upheld.
8. However, under the peculiar facts and circumstances
of the case, we are of the opinion that the respondent-College
should not admit students for the coming academic year 2026-27
without obtaining necessary permissions. If the respondent-
College fails to obtain the necessary permission to continue the
157 students for second year PUC, the State shall be at liberty to
transfer them to some other Institution.
NC: 2026:KHC-D:1693-DB
HC-KAR
Ordered Accordingly.
Liberty is also reserved to the students to sue the
respondent-College, if they are put to any loss or injury due to
fault on the part of the respondent-College.
In light of the above, pending applications, if any, do not
survive for consideration and are accordingly disposed of.
Sd/-
(M.I.ARUN)
JUDGE
Sd/-
(B. MURALIDHARA PAI)
JUDGE
VNP / CT: ASC
List No.: 1 Sl No.: 30
