IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

DATED THIS THE 8^TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2026

BEFORE

THE HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE JYOTI M

WRIT PETITION NO. 39232 OF 2025 (MV)

BETWEEN:

SWASTHI SHREE NEMISAGARA

VARNEEJI ENGLISH MEDIUM

HIGHER PRIMARY SCHOOL,

HIRYANGADI-ANEKERE

KARKALA-574104

UDUPI DISTRICT

REPRESENTED BY ITS

HEAD MISTRESS

SMT. SHARMILA HEGDE

…PETITIONER

(BY SRI. VEERESH M.UPPIN, ADVOCATE FOR

SRI. K.CHANDRANATH ARIGA, ADVOCATE)

AND:

1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA

Digitally signed by

THEJAS KUMAR N REPRESENTED BY CHIEF SECRETARY

Location: HIGH VIDHANA SOUDHA, DR. B.R.AMBEDKAR

COURT OF

BENGALURU-560001.

KARNATAKA

2. THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORT

M.S.BUILDING, DR. B.R.AMBEDKAR

VEEDHI, BENGALURU-560001.

3. THE REGIONAL TRANSPORT OFFICER,

RTO UDUPI, RAJATHADRI, MANIPAL, UDUPI-576 104.

…RESPONDENTS

(BY SMT. RASHMI RAO, HCGP)

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, SEEKING CERTAIN RELIEFS.

THIS WRIT PETITION IS LISTED FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, AN ORDER IS MADE AS UNDER:

ORAL ORDER

Sri.Veeresh M.Uppin, counsel on behalf of Sri.Chandranath Ariga K. for the petitioner and High Court Government Pleader for respondents appeared in person. 2. The captioned writ petition is filed seeking for the following reliefs:

(a) Set aside the endorsement dated 27.11.2025 bearing No.PraaSaaAa/Udupi/Shalavahana/2025-26 issued by respondent No.3 to the petitioner (Annexure-D) (b) Pass any such orders this court deems fit.

3. Counsel for the respective parties would fairly submit that the issue involved in the present Writ Petition is answered by the Co-ordinate Bench of this Court in SMT.SHARADAMMA Vs. STATE OF KARNATAKA AND OTHERS in W.P.No.21991/2019 and connected matters, disposed of on 20.08.2019, and they would submit that the decision therein would squarely apply to the present case. Counsel therefore, submits that an appropriate order may be passed.

4. Heard the arguments and perused the Writ papers with utmost care.

5. In SHARADAMMA’s case cited supra, it is held that State is not empowered to issue Circular and impose condition that 15 years old vehicles are not entitled for renewal of permit as well as fitness.

6. Following the decision cited supra, the present Writ Petition is allowed. The endorsement dated:27.11.2025 issued by respondent No.3 vide Annexure-D is quashed.

7. The writ petition is allowed.

SD/-

(JYOTI M)

JUDGE SS List No.: 1 Sl No.: 12