A university may defer reconsideration of dues linked to procurement irregularities pending a fact-finding report.

Mysore Sales International Limited (MSIL) sought payment of admitted dues of ₹5,69,86,944 under a University order dated 17 January 2025.

The University stated that a preliminary verification report had identified alleged irregularities in procuring and printing marks cards and that a One Man Fact Finding Committee’s report was awaited.

The Single Judge directed the University to reconsider MSIL’s representation within one month of receiving that report and protected MSIL’s interest by providing for 9% annual interest on any amount found payable.

MSIL appealed, seeking immediate payment and contending that its claim should not await the Committee’s report.

1. Whether the Single Judge erred by making reconsideration of MSIL’s claim dependent on receipt of the One Man Fact Finding Committee’s report, rather than directing immediate payment of the admitted dues.

2. Whether the Single Judge’s order, including its provision for interest, warranted appellate interference.

The appeal was brought under Section 4 of the Karnataka High Court Act.

The judgment cites no other statute, precedent, or specific legal test.

The Court considered the Single Judge’s direction to reconsider the claim after receipt of the Committee’s report and the protection afforded by the 9% annual interest provision.

The Court noted that the preliminary verification report alleged irregularities concerning the procurement and printing of marks cards, and that the One Man Fact Finding Committee had not yet submitted its report.

It therefore treated MSIL’s claim as subject to the Committee’s findings.

Since the Single Judge had directed reconsideration after the report was received and had protected MSIL’s interest through the 9% interest provision, the Court found no ground to interfere.

The pending interlocutory applications were disposed of as not surviving for consideration.