In this contempt proceeding, the petitioner alleged violation of an interim order permitting his examination appearance. The court observed that the respondent had communicated the petitioner's ineligibility due to insufficient attendance.
Contempt proceedings stands 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 27TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2020
PRESENT
THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ARAVIND KUMAR
AND
THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE E.S.INDIRESH
C.C.C. No.49/2020
BETWEEN:
N.PREM KUMAR S/O SRI.NAGARAJ AGED ABOUT 25 YEARS, RESIDING AT NO.362, SELLAIKUTTAIKAADU, ERUMAPALAYAM SALEM – 636 005. PRESENTLY RESIDING AT NO.98/B 13TH CROSS, L.R.NAGAR, 1ST STAGE, KORMANGALA BENGALURU – 560 034. (BY SRI PRASAD K.R.RAO, ADVOCATE) AND:
... COMPLAINANT
SMT.VIMALA AGED MAJOR, PRINCIPAL, SREE KRISHNA LAW COLLEGE, MAHALAKSHMI NAGAR, BATTAWADI, TUMAKURU – 572 103.
... ACCUSED
(BY SRI V.B.SIDDARAMAIAH, ADVOCATE)
2
THIS CCC IS FILED UNDER SECTION 11 AND 12 OF THE CONTEMPT OF COURTS ACT, 1971, PRAYING TO HOLD HE ACCUSED GUILTY FOR COMMITTING OFFENCE PUNISHABLE UNDER SECION 12 OF THE CONTEMPT OF COURTS ACT, 1972 THEREBY VIOLATING THE ORDER DATED 27.12.2019 PASSED BY THIS COURT IN W.P.NO.51702/2019 VIDE ANNEXURE – A.
THIS CCC COMING ON FOR ORDERS THIS DAY, ARAVIND KUMAR J, MADE THE FOLLOWING:
O R D E R
None appears for the complainant. This petition has been filed alleging that respondent has violated the order dated 27th December, 2009 passed in Writ Petition N.51702 of 2019. The order so passed reads:
“ Petitioner is permitted to appear in Third Semester Law examination, if he is otherwise eligible, subject to the rider that the results of the said examination, shall not be announced without the leave of this Court. ”
petitioner was permitted to appear for III Semester Law Examination, subject to rider that if he is otherwise eligible. It was also observed that results of said examination should not be announced without the leave of Court.
has filed a memo enclosing a copy of the e-mail forwarded by
3
it to the University whereunder it has been stated that petitioner was not eligible to appear for the examination for want of possessing 70% attendance as per the Karnataka Sate Law University and Bar Council of India Regulations. Hence, we are of the considered view there is no violation of the direction issued by the learned single Judge. Contempt proceedings stands dropped.
Sd/JUDGE
Sd/JUDGE
lnn
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the respondent violated the interim order permitting the petitioner to appear in examinations.
Whether the petitioner was eligible to appear for the examination due to lack of 70% attendance.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
N.Prem Kumar
Smt.Vimala
Aravind Kumar
E.S.Indires
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
