Dismissed

Mr. Somashekar M v. Dr. G C Prakash

Karnataka HC6 Dec 2022CCC/146/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court dropped contempt proceedings filed under Sections 11 and 12 of the Contempt of Courts Act against a Government Authority Commissioner. The Court held that it could not proceed while the Supreme Court had stayed the challenged order in connected appeals, reserving liberty to file a fresh petition later.

What did the court decide?

Civil Contempt Proceedings dropped with liberty to file a fresh petition after disposal of pending Supreme Court matters.

Mr. Somashekar M Vs Dr. G C Prakash — Constitutional and Fundamental Rights | Karnataka HC (2022)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶2

DATED THIS THE 06^TH DAY OF DECEMBER, 2022

¶3

PRESENT

¶4

THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE B.VEERAPPA

¶5

AND

¶6

THE HON’BLE MRS. JUSTICE K.S.HEMALEKHA

¶7

C.C.C. No.146/2020 (CIVIL)

¶8

BETWEEN:

¶9

MR. SOMASHEKAR M. S/O. LATE MUNIRAJU, AGED ABOUT 43 YEARS, R/AT NO.146, 7^TH DIVISION, BEHIND SEETHARAMA TEMPLE, NEAR HASIKARAGA MANTAPA, KENGERI, BANGALORE – 560 060.

¶10

... COMPLAINANT

¶11

(BY SRI IRISHAD AHMED B.M., ADVOCATE)

¶12

AND:

¶13

DR. G.C. PRAKASH, COMMISSIONER, BANGALORE DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY, CHOWDAIAH ROAD, KUMARA PARK WEST, BANGALORE – 560 003.

¶14

... ACCUSED

¶15

(BY SRI B.S. SACHIN, ADVOCATE)

¶16

THIS CCC IS FILED UNDER SECTIONS 11 AND 12 OF THE CONTEMPT OF COURT ACT, 1971, R/W ARTICLE 215 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, BY THE COMPLAINANT, WHEREIN HE PRAYS THAT THE HON’BLE COURT BE PLEASED TO INITIATE CONTEMPT OF COURT ACTION AGAINST THE ACCUSED FOR HAVING WILLFULLY AND DELIBERATELY NOT OBEYING THE ORDERS OF THIS HON’BLE COURT DATED 17.08.2017 MADE IN

¶17

¶18

W.P.NO.35353/2016 (BDA) AND ORDER DATED 05.07.2019 MADE IN W.A.NO.6326/2017 (LA-BDA) C/W W.A.NO.6325/2017 (LA-BDA), W.A.NOS.6415-16/2017 (LA-BDA) AND PUNISH HIM IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW.

¶19

THIS CCC COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, B.VEERAPPA J ., PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

¶20

O R D E R

¶21

The complainant has filed the present contempt

¶22

petition to take action against the accused under the provisions of Sections 11 and 12 of the Contempt of Courts Act for willful disobedience of the order dated 17.08.2017 made in W.P. No.35353/2016 and order dated 05.07.2019 made in W.A. No.6326/2017 and connected matters.

¶23

Learned counsel for the accused filed the

¶24

order passed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court dated 02.03.2020 in Special Leave Petition (Civil) Diary No.5547/2020 arising out of final judgment and order dated 05.07.2019 in W.A. No.6326/2017 passed by the Co-Ordinate Bench of this Court. He further

¶25

¶26

submits that against the order passed in W.A. Nos.6325/2017 6415/2017, 6416/2017 dated 05.07.2019 and R.P.No.267/2021 dated 17.12.2021,

¶27

BDA has filed Special Leave Petition (Civil) Diary No.4745/2022 before the Hon’ble Supreme Court and the Hon’ble Supreme Court issued notice on the application for condonation of delay and also on the special leave petition on 11.03.2022. The matter is not yet posted. He further submits that the Hon’ble Supreme Court on 02.03.2020 Special Leave Petition (Civil) Diary No.5547/2020 stayed the order dated 05.07.2019 passed in W.A. No.6326/2017

¶28

Sri. Irishad Ahmed B.M., learned counsel for the complainant submits that the interim order granted by the Hon’ble Supreme Court does not pertain to the present complainant.

¶29

¶30

Though the learned counsel for the

¶31

complainant submits that the interim order granted by the Hon’ble Supreme Court does not pertain to the present petition, the fact remains that the BDA filed Special Leave Petition (Civil) Diary No.5547/2020 and the common order passed by the Co-Ordinate Bench of this Court dated 05.07.2019 in W.A. No.6326/2017 and connected matters, was stayed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court on 02.03.2020.

¶32

Thereby, in all fairness, this Court cannot

¶33

proceed with the matter till the matter decided by the Hon’ble Supreme Court. Even though an interim order was not granted in the present Special Leave Petition, the common order passed by the Co-Ordinate Bench of this Court has been stayed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court and the same was not confined to only W.A. No.6326/2017 but the entire impugned order, so it

¶34

¶35

amounts to the entire order having been stayed. Thereby, this Court cannot proceed at this stage.

¶36

In view of the above, we pass the

¶37

following:

¶38

ORDER

¶39

The Civil Contempt Proceedings are hereby dropped reserving liberty to the complainant to file a fresh contempt petition after disposal of Special Leave petition (Civil) Diary Nos.5547/2020 and 4745/2022 pending between the parties before the Hon’ble Supreme Court, if the need arises and in accordance with law.

¶40

Sd/JUDGE

¶41

Sd/JUDGE

¶42

MBM

Mr. Somashekar M v. Dr. G C Prakash

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mr. Somashekar M v. Dr. G C Prakash

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Doreswamy Vs State of Karnataka

Jafar Sharief @ Abbu Vs the State

Kumar Gowda G Vs Sri Dr N Shivashankar I a S

Smt.T.H.Ashalatha Vs Dr Vishal

The Registrar General Vs Sri M D Rajanna

M Mahadevaswamy Vs Sri M Rajashekar