KUMARI JAYASHREE Vs. STATE OF KARNATAKA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THESE petitioners questioning the correctness of the impugned order dated 17-7-2003 bearing G. O. No. ED. 254 SHH 2002 on the file of respondent 1 vide Annexure-C and notification dated 24-7-2003 bearing No. PUC/sibbandi/category-2/2003-2004, on the file of respondent 2 vide annexure-D insofar as respondent 3-college is concerned, have presented this writ petition.

(2.) THE grievance made out by the learned Counsel in the instant petition is that, these petitioners are the residents of Chikkajogihalli, Kudligi Taluk, bellary District, who are students studying in I and II year Pre-University course in respondent 3-co!lege and the said college is running since from several years. Also submitted that it is shocking to know that the Government by its order dated 17-7-2003 shifted the Pre-University from Chikkajogihalli to Sringeri, Chikmagalur District. Immediately thereafter, they gave several representations to withdraw the notification. The same is not considered. In view of the in-action of the authorities for non-consideration of their requests and giving effect to the impugned order and notification as referred above, it is submitted that the Government has unilaterally passed the same without conducting any enquiry nor they have sought for any report from the competent Authorities before taking decision by the Government. Hence, the impugned order and notification by the respondents is contrary to the norms of the college, Board of Pre-University Education. Therefore, the petitioners were constrained to move this Court by way of filing writ petition.

(3.) THE principle submission canvassed by the learned Counsel for the petitioners is that, before taking decision, the Government has not appointed any expert committee to find the reality and study the true aspect of the matter. When the college is running since from several years and the students studying in the said college belong to economically weaker section and their parents have no sources for educating their children in any other places except respondent 3-college, if the college is shifted, they will be put to great hardship and inconvenience and they lose further studies particularly girls who are studying in I and II year Pre-University Course in the college. This aspect of the matter has not been taken into consideration by the respondent-Government before passing the impugned order. Further, he submitted that time and again the Principal of the college-respondent 3 sent several recommendations to appoint staff and lecturers to continue the course. The Government has failed deliberately. Due to non-availability of the necessary staff, the students have not taken admission and this has created problem for which the students are penalised for no fault. Further submitted that in respondent 3-college, about 15 students have taken admission to I year pre-University Course and 16 students have taken admission to II year pre-University Course. To substantiate his submission, he placed the endorsement issued by the then Principal of the college that these students have taken admission to Pre-University Course. The learned Counsel further submitted that the Government has taken decision without taking into consideration the mandatory norms of the Board of Pre-University education. When once the college is established, it is not feasible for the government to transfer the college from one place to another as the students will be put to hardship and inconvenience. Therefore, the impugned order and notification passed by the respondent are liable to be set aside.