Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA,AT DHARWAD
SURAJ GOVINDARAJ
Dhanwantri Ayurveda College Hospital And Research Centre – Appellant
Versus
Union Of India – Respondent
ORDER :
SURAJ GOVINDARAJ, J.
1. Being of the considered opinion that the State Government is also required to be brought on record as a necessary party, the State Government, represented by the Directorate of Ayush, is brought on record as respondent No.6. Learned AGA accepts notice for respondent No.6. Petitioner to carry out necessary amendment and file amended cause title.
2. The petitioners are before this Court seeking for the following reliefs:
i. Issue a writ in the nature of certiorari or such other appropriate writ, order or direction, quashing the impugned order dated 25.08.2025 bearing No.4-42/KA/MARB/2025- 26-Ay, issued by R3 vide Annexure-X, only in so for reducing the UG intake from 100 seats to 70 for the academic year 2025-26 for BAMS course in the interest of justice and equity;
ii. Issue a writ in the nature of Mandamus directing the R2 and R3 Authority to grant permission for 100 UG seats by taking note of the submissions and compliance made by the petitioner;
iii. Issue any other writ or order as this Hon’ble Court deems fit to grant in the fact and circumstances of the case and in the aid main relief sought for.
3. The short grievance of the petitioner is that on the
Arbitrary administrative actions, lacking regulatory backing and clear justification, are invalid, reinforcing the need for proportionality in penalties related to institutional compliance.
Penalties for attendance discrepancies must be justified and backed by clear regulations; arbitrary reductions in student intake are unreasonable if lacking sufficient rationale.
Regulation no.9 provides for requirements of college which prescribes that there shall be a minimum teaching faculty as per Schedule-IV for the course.
The court established that institutions must seek prior approval for admissions beyond the prescribed quota, but students may have legitimate expectations based on past practices.
The court emphasized timely decisions on appeals related to educational institutions to prevent undue harm to applicant interests.
The main legal point established is that the decision-making process must adhere to principles of natural justice and be free from bias.
The court emphasized that administrative delays should not deprive institutions of rights to participate in ongoing processes when requisite permissions are granted.
The importance of providing proper opportunity of hearing and access to inspection reports before making decisions on permission for educational institutions.
The court emphasized the necessity of fair hearings and proper consideration of evidence in regulatory decisions affecting educational institutions, ruling against arbitrary penalties and restriction....
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
