Karnataka High Court Weekly Roundup: August 25 - August 31, 2025

Citation No: 2025 LiveLaw (Kar) 286 To 2025 LiveLaw (Kar) 292

Nominal Index:

Case Title: Mantavva & ANR AND The Divisional Controller. 2025 LiveLaw (Kar) 286

Malurappa AND Bangalore Metropolitan Transport Corporation. 2025 LiveLaw (Kar) 287

Seetha Nayak & Others AND Laxmi Kom Nagesh Naik. 2025 LiveLaw (Kar) 288

Subhan Khan AND Prabha Mallikarjun. 2025 LiveLaw (Kar) 289

Sanjana V Tumkur AND State of Karnataka & Others. 2025 LiveLaw (Kar) 290

Jagrutka Karnatak Jagrutha Bharata AND The Secretary & Others. 2025 LiveLaw (Kar) 291

S Venkateshappa AND State of Karnataka. 2025 LiveLaw (Kar) 292

Judgments/Orders

Govt Employee's Brother Eligible For Compassionate Appointment If Employee's Spouse Predeceases Him, Without Leaving Children: Karnataka HC

Case Title: Mantavva & ANR AND The Divisional Controller.

Case No: WRIT PETITION NO. 101661 OF 2025

Citation No: 2025 LiveLaw (Kar) 286

The Karnataka High Court has said that if the spouse of an employee has predeceased the employee and there are no children, the mere marriage of the deceased employee cannot be a ground to reject an application for compassionate appointment to the brother of the deceased.

Justice Suraj Govindaraj held thus while allowing a petition filed by Mantava and Sanganna, mother and brother of deceased employee Veeresh Mantappa Lolasar, an employee working with K.K.R.T.C, Ballari Division.

Karnataka High Court Upholds Dismissal Of BMTC Bus Driver For Securing Employment Based On Fake Educational Documents

Case Title: Malurappa AND Bangalore Metropolitan Transport Corporation

Case No: WRIT APPEAL NO. 1222 OF 2024

Citation No: 2025 LiveLaw (Kar) 287

The Karnataka High Court has upheld an order which dismissed a plea by an employee of Bangalore Metropolitan Transport Corporation (BMTC) accused of securing an appointment on the basis of a false certificate regarding his educational qualifications.

In doing so, the high court rejected the bus driver's reliance on a BMTC circular protecting employees from dismissal on grounds of suppression, after noting that the circular did not contemplate a case where an ineligible employee has secured appointment by furnishing a forged document to satisfy the eligibility condition.

Upholding the single judge's order, a division bench of Chief Justice Vibhu Bakhru and Justice C M Joshi dismissed the petition filed by one Malurappa and said “We find no grounds to interfere with the impugned order. The appeal is accordingly dismissed.”

Order VI Rule 17 CPC | Written Statement Can Only Be Amended By Defendant Who Files It, Not Those Who Have Adopted It: Karnataka HC

Case Title: Seetha Nayak & Others AND Laxmi Kom Nagesh Naik

Case No: WRIT PETITION NO.102555 OF 2025

Citation No: 2025 LiveLaw (Kar) 288

The Karnataka High Court has said that only the defendant who has filed a written statement, in a suit seeking partition and separate possession, can seek amendment of the written statement filed by him, other defendants who have adopted the written statement are not permitted to amend it.

Justice Suraj Govindaraj held thus while dismissing a petition filed by Seeta Nayak and others. He said “In my considered opinion, it would not be permissible for defendant No.4, who has not filed a written statement, to seek amendment of a written statement not filed by defendant No.4.”

Allegations Of 'Bribing' Voters Prior To Being Nominated As A Candidate Cannot Be Termed 'Corrupt Practice' Under RP Act: Karnataka HC

Case Title: Subhan Khan AND Prabha Mallikarjun

Case No: ELECTION PETITION NO.3 OF 2024

Citation No: 2025 LiveLaw (Kar) 289

The Karnataka High Court has said that any alleged corrupt act done by a candidate prior to being nominated for elections cannot be termed as a corrupt practice under the Representation of People Act.

For context, Section 123 of the RP Act pertains to corrupt practices, which includes bribery.

Bribery is explained as any gift, offer or promise by a candidate or his agent or by any other person with the consent of a candidate or his election agent of any gratification, to any person with the object of inducing (a) a person to stand or not to stand as, or to withdraw or not to withdraw from being a candidate at an election; (b) or an elector to vote or refrain from voting at an election.

Karnataka High Court Directs College To Pay ₹15 Lakh To Student Wrongfully Denied Admission To MBBS Course Despite Paying Fee

Case Title: Sanjana V Tumkur AND State of Karnataka & Others

Case No: WRIT PETITION NO.6014 OF 2018

Citation No: 2025 LiveLaw (Kar) 290

The Karnataka High Court directed Sri Siddartha Academy of Higher Education a deemed to be University running Sri Siddhartha Medical College to pay Rs. 15 Lakh as compensation to a student for denying her admission to the MBBS course for academic year 2017-18, despite her paying fee for the first year within time.

A division bench of Justice Anu Sivaraman and Justice K Manmadha Rao held thus while disposing of a petition filed by a student Sanjana V Tumkur.

“We notice that the instant case was one where the writ petitioner was not at fault and it was only on account of the illegal demand raised by respondent No.6 that she was unable to join a MBBS Course in the Academic Year 2017-2018. She had paid the first year fees before the prescribed date, she had also provided the Bank Guarantee immediately thereafter, that is, on 08.09.2017. Hence, we are of the opinion that this is a fit case, where compensation should be awarded to the petitioner by respondent No.6 College for the denial of admission for the year 2017-2018.”

Karnataka High Court Rejects PIL Against Rahul Gandhi, Others Over Allegedly Missing 'Volume 2' Of Mahatma Gandhi's Autobiography

Case Title: Jagrutka Karnatak Jagrutha Bharata AND The Secretary & Others

Case No: WP 33695/2025

Citation No: 2025 LiveLaw (Kar) 291

The Karnataka High Court today (August 28) dismissed a PIL filed seeking directions to Leader of Opposition Rahul Gandhi, Lok Sabha Speaker Om Birla and others to throw light on 'Volume 2' of Mahatma Gandhi's autobiography— My Experiments with Truth, stated to be 'missing'.

A division bench of Chief Justice Vibhu Bakhru and Justice CM Joshi dismissed the plea filed by an organisation namely 'Jagrutha Karnataka, Jagrutha Bharatha', which was represented by its President K N Manjunatha in person.

Govt Employee's Transfer Is Not Vitiated Merely Due To Being Made Upon Recommendation By MLA: Karnataka High Court

Case Title: S Venkateshappa AND State of Karnataka

Case No: WRIT PETITION NO.3612/2025

Citation No: 2025 LiveLaw (Kar) 292

The Karnataka High Court has said that the transfer of a government employee would not be vitiated for being made solely at the instance or recommendation of a Member of Legislative Assembly (MLA).

A division bench of Justice S G Pandit and Justice K V Aravind said thus while dismissing the petition filed by S Venkateshappa, a Tashildar, challenging the order of the Karnataka Administrative Tribunal rejecting his prayer to quash the impugned order of transfer and posting of respondent No.4 in his place under notification dated 31.12.2024.