In these contempt proceedings filed for non-compliance with a writ order directing a decision on recurring expenditure, the High Court dropped the complaint after the accused tendered an unconditional apology and a decision approving fund release was communicated.
Contempt proceedings stood dropped.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 13TH DAY OF NOVEMBER 2019
PRESENT
THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ARAVIND KUMAR
AND
THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE N.S. SANJAY GOWDA
C.C.C. No.621/2019
BETWEEN:
SMT. V.V. VIJAYALAKSHMI D/O SRI. LATE V.S. VISHWESHWARAIAH C/O SRI. A.L. THANDI AGED ABOUT 62 YEARS SRI. KRUPA,VIDYANAGAR KADUR, CHIKMAGALUR DISTRICT - 577 548.
... COMPLAINANT
(BY SRI. SACHIN V.R, ADVOCATE)
AND:
B.S. SHEKARAPPA AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS THE DIRECTOR DIRECTORATE OF MUNICIPAL ADMINISTRATION VISHWESHWARAYYA TOWER VIDHANA VEEDHI BANGALORE - 560 001.
... ACCUSED
(BY SRI. V. SREENIDHI, AGA)
THIS CCC IS FILED UNDER SECTION 11 AND 12 OF THE CONTEMPT OF COURTS ACT, 1971, PRAYING TO
2
INITIATE CONTEMPT OF COURT PROCEEDINGS AGAINST THE ACCUSED FOR HAVING COMMITTED CONTEMPT OF COURT IN NOT IMPLEMENTING THE DIRECTIONS ISSUED BY THIS HON’BLE COURT 12.06.2018 PASSED IN W.P. NO.51275/2017(S-R)
THIS CCC COMING ON FOR ORDERS THIS DAY, ARAVIND KUMAR J, MADE THE FOLLOWING:
O R D E R
These proceedings have been initiated by the complainant alleging that respondent has willfully disobeyed the order dated 12.06.2018 passed in W.P.No.51275/2017 – Annexure-A whereunder following direction came to be issued:
“4. Though the nature of xxxx required to be paid. In that view, the appropriate course would be to permit the petitioner to file a representation along with all the supporting documents and a copy of this order with the Respondent No.2. The Respondent No.2 shall secure all particulars from the concerned office/authority and take a decision in the matter. Needless to mention, if the decision is to be taken by any other Authority, or approval is to be obtained in that regard, the said process also be undertaken by the respondents in accordance with law. In any event, the decision, one way or the other shall be taken by Respondent No.2 as expeditiously as possible but not later
3
than two months from the date on which the representation is submitted . If the decision is in favour of the petitioner, steps to make the disbursement shall also be taken expeditiously thereafter.”
copy of the communication dated 11.11.2019 forwarded issued by fourth respondent (in W.P.No.51275/2017) to the Deputy Director, District Treasury, whereunder amounts have been ordered to be released in favour of the complainant. In the event of complainant being aggrieved by order dated 12.10.2019 (Annexure-R-11),
4
she would be at liberty to challenge the same in accordance with law. Hence, contempt proceedings stands dropped.
SD/JUDGE
SD/JUDGE
DR
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the complaint for contempt should be allowed given that a decision was taken and apology offered?
Whether the impugned order directing release of funds should be challenged via this contempt proceeding?
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
W.P. No.51275/2017(S-R)Applied¶19
2 provisions across 2 enactments
Smt. V.V. Vijayalakshmi
B.S. Shekarappa
Directorate of Municipal Administration
State of Karnataka (represented by AGA)
Aravind Kumar
N.S. Sanjay Gowda
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
