SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2026 Supreme(Online)(Kar) 11112

THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
E.S.INDIRESH
MR. G SASHANTH – Appellant
Versus
UNIVERSITY GRANTS COMMISSION (UGC) – Respondent
WP 2163/2026



##PAGE1##

- 1 -

NC: 2026:KHC:16295 WP NO.2163 OF 2026

HC-KAR

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 23RD DAY OF MARCH, 2026

BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE E.S. INDIRESH

WRIT PETITION NO.2163 OF 2026 (EDN-RES)

BETWEEN:

MR. G. SASHANTH S/O SRI. J. GOPIKRISHNA,

AGED ABOUT 19 YEARS, R/AT NO.A-103,

SKYGOLD ELEGANCE APARTMENT, CHOKKANAHALLI MAIN ROAD,

OPP. TO PROVIDENT HARMONY APARTMENT, DR. SHIVARAMAKARANTHNAGAR,

BENGALURU NORTH, BENGALURU - 560 077.

…PETITIONER (BY SRI. SUBRAMANYA S. UPASANA, ADVOCATE)

AND:

1. UNIVERSITY GRANTS COMMISSION (UGC)

BAHUDUR SHAN ZAFAR MARG, NEW DELHI - 110 002.

Digitally signed REP. BY THE REGISTRAR.

by CHAYA S A Location: HIGH COURT OF 2. R.V. UNIVERSITY,

KARNATAKA R.V. VIDYANIKETAN, 8TH MILE, MYSURU ROAD,

BENGALURU - 560 059.

REP. BY ITS REGISTRAR.

3. STUDENT DISCIPLINARY COMMITTEE, R.V. UNIVERSITY,

R.V. VIDYANIKETAN, 8TH MILE, MYSURU ROAD,

BENGALURU - 560 059.

REP. BY THE CHAIRPERSON.

##PAGE2##

- 2 -

NC: 2026:KHC:16295 WP NO.2163 OF 2026

HC-KAR

4. THE VICE CHANCELLOR, R.V. UNIVERSITY,

R.V. VIDYANIKETAN, 8TH MILE, MYSURU ROAD,

BENGALURU - 560 059. 5. AADYA D. PAWAR,

D/O DEEPAK G. PAWAR, AGED ABOUT 19 YEARS,

R/AT NO. 40/3, SABURI PATANKAR LAYOUT, 13TH CROSS, 6TH MAIN,

MALLESWARAM, BENGALURU - 560 003.

…RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. SHOWRI H.R., ADVOCATE FOR R1;

SRI. SOMASHEKAR, ADVOCATE FOR R2 TO R4;

SRI. THILAK RAJ S.V., ADVOCATE FOR R5)

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF TE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO DECLARE THAT THE RE-ISSUANCE OF SHOW CAUSE NOTICE DATED 18TH AUGUST, 2025 BY THE RESPONDENT NO.3 VIDE ANNEXURE-H1 AND INITIATION OF ENQUIRY AGAINST THE PETITIONER ON THE BASIS OF THE SELF-SERVING AND MOTIVATED REPORT OF THE FATHER OF THE RESPONDENT NO.5 VIDE ANNEXURE-G SERIES DEPRIVED THE PETITIONER FROM PURSUING HIS STUDIES IS PER SE ARBITRARY, BAD IN LAW AND UNCONSTITUTIONAL; QUASH THE ORDER DATED 22ND DECEMBER, 2025 PASSED BY THE STUDENT DISCIPLINARY COMMITTEE HEADED BY THE DEAN STUDENT AFFAIRS VIDE

ANNEXURE-N; AND ETC.

THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING IN 'B' GROUP, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS

UNDER:

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE E.S. INDIRESH

##PAGE3##

- 3 -

NC: 2026:KHC:16295 WP NO.2163 OF 2026

HC-KAR

ORAL ORDER

In this writ petition, the petitioner is challenging the

action of the respondent No.2-University in barring the petitioner from entering into the respondent No.2-University premises in compliance with the direction issued by this Court

in Writ Petition No.32079 of 2025 (Annexure-M).

2. Heard Sri. Subramanya S. Upasana, learned

counsel appearing for the petitioner; Sri. Showri H.R., learned counsel appearing for the respondent No.1; Sri. Somashekar, learned counsel appearing for respondents 2 to 4; and Sri. Thilak Raj S.V., learned counsel appearing for the respondent

No.5.

3. Sri. Subramanya S. Upasana, learned counsel

appearing for the petitioner invited the attention of the Court to the decision taken by the respondent No.3-Student Disciplinary Committee at Annexure-E and submitted that the said Committee had condoned the allegations made against the petitioner by issuing a warning to the petitioner for alleged acts of indiscipline in the respondent No.2-Univesity. Learned counsel further submits that, in furtherance of the warning

##PAGE4##

- 4 -

NC: 2026:KHC:16295 WP NO.2163 OF 2026

HC-KAR

issued by the respondent No.3-Committee, the petitioner has not misbehaved with anyone much less the respondent No.5 herein, however, the respondent No.2-Univesity barred the petitioner from entering into the premises of the respondent No.2-University. Accordingly, he sought for interference of this

Court.

4. Per contra, Sri. Somashekar, learned counsel

appearing for respondents 2 to 4 refers to the Annexure-R3K and submitted the conduct of the petitioner herein has been followed and video clips shows that the petitioner continued to be misbehaved with the respondent No.5 and therefore, the

action has been taken against the petitioner.

5. Sri. Thilak Raj S.V., learned counsel appearing for

the respondent No

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

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

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top