##PAGE1##

- 1 -

NC: 2026:KHC-D:5869

WP No. 100270 of 2026

HC-KAR

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, AT DHARWAD

DATED THIS THE 22^ND DAY OF APRIL, 2026

BEFORE

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK S. KINAGI

WRIT PETITION NO. 100270 OF 2026 (GM-RES)

BETWEEN:

1. THE PRINCIPAL

SRI CHANNABASAVA SWAMY MOTOR

DRIVING SCHOOL (C.B.S DRIVING SCHOOL)

NEAR APMC, R.G ROAD GANGAVATI

R/BY ASHOKAGOUDA S/O HANAMGOUDA

AGE. 55 YRS, OCC. PRINCIPAL

R/O. AMAR BHAGATSINGH NAGAR

GANGAVATI, TQ. KOPPAL

…PETITIONER

(BY SRI. PRAVEENKUMAR G., ADV FOR SRI. ANAND R. KOLLI, ADV)

AND:

1. THE STATE GOVERNMENT

R/BY PRINCIPAL SECRETARY

DEPARTMENT OF STATE TRANSPORT

M S BUILDING, BENGALURU 560001

2. IN CHARGE REGIONAL TRANSPORT OFFICER

LICENCE ISSUING AUTHORITY AND

Digitally signed by REGISTRATION AUTHORITY, KOPPAL 583201

MOHANKUMAR B

SHELAR

Location: HIGH …RESPONDENTS

COURT OF

KARNATAKA (BY SRI. T. HANAMAREDDY, AGA FOR RESPONDENTS)

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 & 227 OF

THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO,

A) ISSUE A WRIT OF NATURE OF CERTIORARI QUASHING THE

IMPUGNED ORDER BEARING ¸ÀASÉå: ¥Áæ¸ÁC/¹§âA¢/PÉÆ/ZÁvÀ±Á/25-26-1003

DATED 25.11.2025 PASSED BY THE RESPONDENT NO.2 AUTHORITY,

MARKED AS ANNEXURE-E.

- 2 -

NC: 2026:KHC-D:5869

WP No. 100270 of 2026

HC-KAR

B) ISSUE A WRIT OF NATURE OF CERTIORARI QUASHING THE

IMPUGNED ORDER BEARING ¸ÀASÉå: (cid:23)ÉʤåÁæ/PÉÆ/2025-26 DATED

15.12.2025 PASSED BY THE RESPONDENT NO.2 AUTHORITY, MARKED

AS ANNEXURE-G IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY.

THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, ORDER

WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:

ORAL ORDER

(PER: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK S. KINAGI)

1. The petitioner has filed this present writ petition

challenging the impugned orders dated 25.11.2015 &

15.12.2025, vide Annexure-E and Annexure-G respectively

passed by the respondent No.2 authority.

2. Brief facts, leading rise to the filing of this

petition are as follows:

3. One Mahadevappa Gavali had appointed as a

trainer under the petitioner’s motor driving school. He had

completed a Diploma in Automobile Engineering and was a

licence holder, vide Annexure-H.

- 3 -

NC: 2026:KHC-D:5869

WP No. 100270 of 2026

HC-KAR

4. Respondent No.2 issued a licence dated

29.02.2008 to the petitioner to run a motor driving school

vide Annexure-A. Further, the petitioner had applied for

renewal of the licence from time to time, and the same was

duly renewed. The licence has been renewed till

28.02.2018, as per Annexure-B.

5. Thereafter, While the licence was still in force,

Respondent No.2 issued a direction by passing an order

dated 25.11.2025 (Annexure-E), directing the petitioner not

to run the motor driving school. The petitioner submitted a

reply to the said notice (Annexure-F). However, without

properly considering the reply, Respondent No.2 passed the

impugned order vide (Annexure-G), revoking the

petitioner’s licence.

6. Aggrieved by the same, the petitioner has filed

the present writ petition.

7. Heard the arguments of the learned counsel for

the petitioner and the learned Additional Government

Advocate.

- 4 -

NC: 2026:KHC-D:5869

WP No. 100270 of 2026

HC-KAR

8. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that,

no opportunity of personal hearing was provided before

passing the impugned orders by respondent No.2. It is

contended that the impugned orders have been passed by

the respondent No.2 is in violation of the principles of

natural justice and on this ground alone, the present writ

petition deserves to be allowed.

9. Per contra, the learned Additional Government

Advocate submits, that no personal hearing was granted to

the petitioner. He further submits that, if reasonable time is

granted to respondents, the respondents would provide an

opportunity of personal hearing to the petitioner and

thereafter pass appropriate orders in accordance with law.

He accordingly prays for disposal of the present writ

petition.

10. Perused the records, and considered the

submissions made by the learned counsel on both sides.

11. It is an undisputed fact that, the petitioner was

granted a licence to run a motor driving school, which