The High Court of Karnataka dropped contempt proceedings against a Tahsildar who issued an endorsement in compliance with a prior order determining claimants ineligible for relief, allowing challengers to contest the endorsement in regular proceedings.
Contempt proceedings dropped. Petitioners permitted to challenge endorsement in regular proceedings.
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 18TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2022
PRESENT
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE B. VEERAPPA
AND
THE HON’BLE Mrs. JUSTICE M.G. UMA
C.C.C.No.818/2021 (CIVIL)
BETWEEN:
...COMPLAINANTS
(BY SRI. PRAKASH M.H., ADVOCATE)
2
AND:
…ACCUSED
(BY SRI. KIRAN KUMAR, HCGP FOR R2 TO R4)
THIS CCC IS FILED UNDER SECTIONS 11 AND 12 OF THE CONTEMPT OF COURT ACT R/W ARTICLE 215 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO INITIATE NECESSARY ACTION AGAINST THE ACCUSED NO.1 IN RESPECT OF THE DISOBEDIENCE OF THE ORDER DATED 23.04.2021 PASSED IN W.P.NO.7335/2021 VIDE ANNEXURE-D.
THIS CCC COMING ON FOR ORDERS THIS DAY, THROUGH VIDEO CONFERENCE B.VEERAPPA J. , MADE THE FOLLOWING:
3
O R D E R
The complainants have filed the present contempt petition to take action against accused No.1 under the provisions of Sections 11 and 12 of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971, for willful disobedience of the order dated 23.04.2021 passed by the learned Single Judge in W.P.No.7335/2021, wherein, learned Single Judge while disposing of the writ petition, directed the 4th respondent – Tahsildar to consider and dispose of the representations of the petitioners at Annexures-J, K and L to the writ petition, within an outer limit of four months from the date of receipt of copy of the order.
"3. I most respectfully submit that in compliance of the order passed by this Hon'ble Court and by considering the representations of the complainants, I have passed a detailed endorsement on 17.12.2021. As per which, we have after conducting an enquiry and
4
come to the conclusion that the complainants and few other similarly placed persons are not entitled for any reliefs, because the complainant has failed to prove by producing documents regarding him being a project displaced persons. Copy of the order dated 17.12.2021 is produced and marked as ANNEXURE-R1 .
4. I most respectfully submit that after enquiry I have also found that few other persons are entitled for the reliefs as such an endorsement has been issued by the said persons accordingly. An endorsement issued by me on 7.12.2021 to the complainant and such similarly placed persons has been communicated to the Complainant through the Deputy Tahsildar, Ayanuru Hobli. The copy of the acknowledgement for having served is produced and marked as ANNEXURE-R2. "
5
Tahsildar. If the complainants are aggrieved by the said endorsement, they have to challenge the same.
ORDER
Sd/JUDGE
Sd/JUDGE
SMJ
1 issue framed by the court
Whether complance with a single judge order by the tahsildar of issuing an endorsement despite complainant objections warrants dropping of contempt proceedings.
2 provisions across 2 enactments
SRI. K. HOOVAPPA
SRI. MAHESH S.
SRI. N.J. NAGARAJ
THE STATE OF KARNATAKA
B. VEERAPPA
M.G. UMA
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
