Karnataka High Court Dismisses Writ Petition Seeking Mandamus to Increase Intake in Physiotherapy College — No Statutory Right to Enhanced Intake. Court holds that the petitioner has no vested right to increase student intake and the remedy lies in approaching the appropriate statutory bodies under the relevant regulations.

High Court: Karnataka High Court Bench: BENGALURU
  • 74
Judgement Image
Font size:
Print

Case Note & Summary

The petitioner, Shanti Dhama College of Physiotherapy, managed by Shree Gangadhareshwara Educational Trust, filed a writ petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India seeking a writ of mandamus to direct the first respondent, the Principal Secretary, Government of Karnataka, Department of Health and Family Welfare, to consider its representation dated 18.10.2021 and modify the order dated 08.11.2019 to permit the petitioner to take 40 students intake in the Bachelor of Physiotherapy course from the academic year 2021-2022. The petitioner had been running the course with a permitted intake of 20 students and had made repeated applications for increasing the intake to 40. The court noted that the petitioner had no statutory right to claim such increase and that the remedy lay before the appropriate statutory bodies. Consequently, the court dismissed the writ petition, holding that a writ of mandamus cannot be issued without a legal right and a corresponding duty on the respondent.

Headnote

A) Constitutional Law - Writ of Mandamus - Legal Right - The petitioner sought a writ of mandamus to direct the respondents to increase student intake from 20 to 40. The court held that a writ of mandamus can only be issued if the petitioner has a legal right and the respondent has a corresponding duty. In the absence of any statutory right, the petition was dismissed. (Paras 1-3)

B) Education Law - Increase of Intake - Statutory Bodies - The petitioner's grievance regarding increase of intake must be addressed by the appropriate statutory bodies under the relevant regulations, not by the High Court under Article 226. (Paras 2-3)

Subscribe to unlock Headnote Subscribe Now

Issue of Consideration

Whether the petitioner has a legal right to seek a writ of mandamus directing the respondents to increase the student intake from 20 to 40 in the Bachelor of Physiotherapy course.

Subscribe to unlock Issue of Consideration Subscribe Now

Final Decision

The writ petition is dismissed.

Law Points

  • No statutory right to increase intake
  • Mandamus not maintainable without legal right
  • Remedy lies before statutory bodies
Subscribe to unlock Law Points Subscribe Now

Case Details

2022 LawText (KAR) (03) 3

Writ Petition No.3503/2022 (EDN-RES)

2022-03-28

P. Krishna Bhat

For Petitioner: Sri. N. Shivakumar; For Respondent 1: Sri. B.V. Krishna, AGA; For Respondent 2: Sri. N.K. Ramesh

Shanti Dhama College of Physiotherapy, Managed by: Shree Gangadhareshwara Educational Trust (R), Represented by its Vice President Mr. Dhananjay

1. The Principal Secretary, Government of Karnataka, Department of Health and Family Welfare, (Medical Education), Bengaluru; 2. Rajiv Gandhi University of Higher Studies, Bengaluru, Represented by its Registrar

Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more) Subscribe Now

Nature of Litigation

Writ petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India seeking a writ of mandamus.

Remedy Sought

Petitioner sought direction to the first respondent to consider its representation dated 18.10.2021 and modify the order dated 08.11.2019 to permit intake of 40 students in the Bachelor of Physiotherapy course from academic year 2021-2022.

Filing Reason

Petitioner's repeated applications for increasing student intake from 20 to 40 were not considered by the respondents.

Issues

Whether the petitioner has a legal right to seek a writ of mandamus for increase of student intake.

Submissions/Arguments

Petitioner argued that despite repeated applications, the respondents failed to consider the request for increase of intake.

Ratio Decidendi

A writ of mandamus can only be issued if the petitioner has a legal right and the respondent has a corresponding duty. In the absence of any statutory right to increase intake, the petition is not maintainable.

Judgment Excerpts

The petitioner is seeking the following relief: 'Issue a writ of mandamus or any appropriate writ order direction in the nature to direct the 1st respondent to consider the petitioner’s representation dated 18/10/2021 vide Annexure-G and modify portion of 1st respondent’s order passed in Order No. MED 623 MMC 2019 dated 08/11/2019 and direct them to permit the petitioner to take 40 students intake in the petitioner college from the academic year 2021-2022 vide Annexure-A etc.' The grievance of the petitioner is that, even though the petitioner is running a Bachelor of Physiotherapy course with the permitted intake of 20 students and has been making repeated applications for increasing intake to 40 students (that is increase of students strength by 20), neither the University nor the Government has been...

Procedural History

The writ petition was filed under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India and came up for preliminary hearing in 'B' group on 28.03.2022, when the court made the order dismissing the petition.

Acts & Sections

  • Constitution of India: Articles 226, 227
Subscribe to unlock full Legal Analysis Subscribe Now
Related Judgement
High Court Karnataka High Court Dismisses Writ Petition Seeking Mandamus to Increase Intake in Physiotherapy College — No Statutory Right to Enhanced Intake. Court holds that the petitioner has no vested right to increase student intake and the remedy lies in...
Related Judgement
High Court Bombay High Court Dismisses State Appeal Against Acquittal in Murder Case Due to Unreliable Eyewitness Testimony. The court held that the trial court's acquittal was not perverse as the sole eyewitness's testimony lacked corroboration and was inconsi...