The High Court held that the contempt proceedings are dropped due to substantial compliance by the accused. It ruled that disputes regarding the quantum of subsistence allowance must be addressed in appropriate proceedings, not通过使用 contempt.
The contempt proceedings are 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.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 26TH DAY OF AUGUST, 2021
PRESENT
THE HON’BLE MRS.JUSTICE S.SUJATHA
AND
THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE RAVI V. HOSMANI
C.C.C.No.1620/2018
BETWEEN :
S.S.BASAVARAJ S/O SHESHEGOWDA AGED ABOUT 42 YEARS R/AT SRISHAILA NILAYA KEMPEGOWDA ROAD, AMARAJYOTHINAGAR TUMAKURU – 572101
...COMPLAINANT
(BY SRI S.N.BHAT, ADV.)
AND :
DODDANANJAIAH FATHER NAME NOT KNOWN TO ACCUSED AGED ABOUT 70 YEARS THE SECRETARY OF MAHATHMA GANDHI MEMORIAL EUDCATION SOCIETY S.S.PURAM, TUMAKURU – 572101 …ACCUSED
(BY SRI M.VINAYA KEERTHY, ADV.)
THIS CCC IS FILED UNDER SECTIONS 11 & 12 OF THE CONTEMPT OF COURTS ACT, PRAYING TO INITIATE CONTEMPT PROCEEDINGS AGAINST THE ACCUSED FOR WILFUL
DISOBEDIENCE OF THE ORDER OF THIS HON'BLE COURT DATED 19.03.2018 PASSED IN W.P.NO.28441/2015.
THIS CCC COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, S. SUJATHA, J ., PASSED THE FOLLOWING:
O R D E R
This contempt petition is filed by the complainant alleging wilful disobedience and breach of the order dated 19.03.2018 passed by the writ Court in W.P.No.28441/2015.
W.P.No.28441/2015 before this Court seeking direction to implement the order passed by the Director and Appellate Authority, Pre-university Education Board, dated 11.11.2014. The writ Court clubbed this matter along with identical matters and disposed of the matters vide order dated 19.03.2018, issuing a direction to the accused herein to pay the current subsistence allowance and to continue to be paid in future till the conclusion of the inquiry within the outer limit of three
months from the date of passing of the order. It was further ordered that if the arrears are not paid within the said period of three months, the suspension orders shall stand automatically revoked and shall be deemed that the employees concerned shall stand re-instated into service though the Management would have the right to continue and conclude the inquiry against the employees concerned. It was further ordered that the inquiry initiated against the employees concerned, shall be concluded in an expeditious manner, but in any event, within the outer limit of six months from the date of the order.
accused along with the memo of calculation.
submitted that the inquiry was concluded in compliance with the directions issued by the writ Court and the complainant was terminated from service as per the order dated 29.04.2019. Learned counsel referring to the order of this Court in CCC No.2172/2018 dated 03.07.2019 submitted that in identical circumstances, the contempt Court recording the substantial compliance of the order of the learned Single Judge passed in W.P.No.55491/2014 and connected matters has dropped the contempt proceedings holding that insofar as the quantum of the amount paid is concerned, the complainant is always entitled to question the same in an appropriate proceedings and not in a contempt proceeding. On these grounds, learned counsel sought for dropping the proceedings against the accused.
- 5 -
disputes the quantum of subsistence allowance paid. He submits that the complainant is entitled for a greater amount that what was paid.
ground to proceed further.
The contempt proceedings are dropped.
Sd/JUDGE
Sd/JUDGE
PMR
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the accused committed contempt of court by failing to fully comply with the subsistence allowance order.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
context_2172_2018Referred¶30
CCC No.2172/2018 dated 03.07.2019
1 provisions across 1 enactments
S. SUJATHA
RAVI V. HOSMANI
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
