A civil contempt petition filed by an individual against the Commissioner, Directorate of Municipal Administration for disobeying earlier writ orders was disposed of. The High Court dropped the proceedings, noting the accused had issued an order rejecting the claim consistent with the earlier judgment.
Contempt proceedings 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.
CCC No. 1810 of 2018
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 6TH DAY OF DECEMBER, 2022
PRESENT
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE B.VEERAPPA
AND
THE HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE K. S. HEMALEKHA
CIVIL CONTEMPT PETITION NO. 1810 OF 2018
BETWEEN:
…COMPLAINANT
(BY SRI. RAMESH K. R., ADVOCATE)
AND:
Digitally signed by GAVRIBIDANUR SUBRAMANYA GUPTA SREENATH Location: High Court of Karnataka
(BY SRI KIRAN KUMAR, HCGP)
…ACCUSED
THIS CCC IS FILED UNDER SECTIONS 11 & 12 OF THE CONTEMPT OF COURTS ACT, R/W ARTICLE 215 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, BY THE COMPLAINANT, PRAYING TO INITIATE CONTEMPT PROCEEDINGS AGAINST THE
CCC No. 1810 of 2018
ACCUSED FOR HAVING COMMITTED THE CONTEMPT OF THE ORDER PASSED BY THE LEARNED SINGLE JUDGE OF THIS COURT IN W.P.NO.15332/2014 AND 33908-33909/2014 DATED 05.09.2017 VIDE ANNEXURE-G AND THE ORDER PASSED BY THIS COURT IN WP No.57779/2014 DATED 05.09.2017 VIDE ANNEXURE-F.
THIS CCC COMING ON FOR FRAMING OF CHARGES THIS DAY, B.VEERAPPA J., MADE THE FOLLOWING:
O R D E R
The complainant filed the present contempt petition to take action against the accused under the provisions of Sections 11 and 12 of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 for willful and deliberate disobedience of the order dated 5.9.2017 made in Writ Petition No.15332/2014 & 33908-33909/2014 and the order dated 5th September 2017 made in Writ Petition No.57779/2014.
has passed the order which reads as under:
"14. Therefore, the impugned endorsement at Annexure-F is quashed. The matter is remanded to the first respondent to reconsider the application made by the petitioner herein within a period of
CCC No. 1810 of 2018
three months from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order in light of the aforesaid observations and in accordance with the Rules and in terms of the compromise extracted above."
"17. Hence, we dispose of the appeal by passing the following order:
(i) We disapprove the view taken by the learned Single Judge in paragraphs 9 and 11 of the impugned judgment;
(ii) However, the direction issued in paragraph 14 of the impugned judgment would remain. But the case of the first respondent shall be considered in the light of the law laid down by this Court by this judgment;
CCC No. 1810 of 2018
(iii) We clarify that what we have held above about the consent decree between the first and third respondents, applies only to the issue of compassionate appointment and the observations made in this order shall not be construed as if this Court has held that the remaining part of the consent decree is not lawful;
(iv) We direct the appellant to give all the particulars about the amounts paid to the third respondent on account of the services rendered by the deceased Government employee. The information with all the details shall be provided by the appellant within a period of one month from the date on which a copy of this judgment is available;
(v) This order will not prevent the first respondent from initiating proceedings for recovery of the amount from the third respondent in accordance with the consent decree;
(vi) The appeal is partly allowed."
learned Single Judge of this Court in Writ Petition
CCC No. 1810 of 2018
No.57779/2014 at paragraph-14 stated supra, has been complied by the State. In support of the same, he has filed the affidavit of Smt. Anupama, Project Director, District Urban Development Cell, wherein it is stated as under:
"On the basis of the above Judgment, the Government has issued a Circular dated: 27.08.2015 stating that the second wife is not entitled for appointment on compassionate ground. Accordingly, the accused have issued an Endorsement rejecting the claim of the Complainant by passing a detailed Order on 04.04.2018. A copy of the said Order passed by the first Accused is produced herewith and marked as Annexure-R1 for kind perusal of this Hon'ble Court. True copy of the Judgment referred by the Hon'ble Division Bench of this Hon'ble court in W.A.No.442/2010 dated: 29.08.2013 is produced herewith and marked as Annexure-R2 for kind perusal of this Hon'ble court. The Circular dated: 27.08.2015 is produced herewith and marked as Annexure- R3 for kind perusal of this Hon'ble Court."
CCC No. 1810 of 2018
O R D E R
ii) It is needless to observe that it is always open for the complainant to challenge the order dated 4.4.2018 passed by the accused (Annexure-R1), if so advised in accordance with law.
Sd/JUDGE
Sd/JUDGE
GSS
1 provisions across 1 enactments
B.VEERAPPA
K. S. HEMALEKHA
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
