Dismissed

Santosh S/O Banudas Karbari v. the Chief Executive Officer and Ors.

Karnataka HC8 Jun 2023CCC/200204/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Complaint regarding disobedience of court order in a service dispute raised under Contempt of Courts Act. Court found substantial compliance with the order via reinstatement and unconditional apology, thus dropping contempt proceedings.

What did the court decide?

Contempt proceedings dropped; application I.A.No.2/2022 disposed of; liberty granted to complainant to revive proceedings if no appeal is filed.

Santosh S/O Banudas Karbari Vs the Chief… — Writ and Judicial Review | Karnataka HC (2023)

¶1

¶2

CCC No. 200204 of 2022

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA,

¶4

KALABURAGI BENCH

¶5

DATED THIS THE 8^TH DAY OF JUNE, 2023

¶6

PRESENT

¶7

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE B.M.SHYAM PRASAD

¶8

AND

¶9

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE UMESH M ADIGA

¶10

CIVIL CONTEMPT PETITION NO.200204 OF 2022

¶11

BETWEEN:

¶12

SANTOSH S/O BANUDAS KARBARI

¶13

AGED ABOUT: 45 YEARS, OCC: CLERK CUM DATA ENTRY OPERATOR, HOLSAMUDRA GRAM PANCHAYAT, R/O: KAMAL NAGAR- 585 417, TQ: AURAD, DIST: BIDAR

¶14

…COMPLAINANT

¶15

Digitally signed by SWETA KULKARNI Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

¶16

(BY SRI SANTOSH BIRADAR, ADVOCATE)

¶17

AND:

¶18

SMT. SHILPA M., THE CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER

¶19

ZILLA PANCHAYAT, BIDAR, DIST: BIDAR -585 401

¶20

SRI SHIVAKUMAR GHATE EXECUTIVE OFFICER, TALUKA PANCHAYAT AURAD (B) -585 326, DIST: BIDAR

¶21

SRI BALAJI BIRADAR PANCHAYAT DEVELOPMENT OFFICER,

¶22

¶23

CCC No. 200204 of 2022

¶24

HOLASAMUDRA GRAM PANCHAYAT, HOLSAMUDRA- 585 417, TQ: AURAD (B), DIST: BIDAR

¶25

SRI HANMANTRAO KOUTAGE ASSISTANT DIRECTOR,

¶26

MGNREGA TALUKA PANCHAYAT AURAD (B)-585 326, DIST: BIDAR

¶27

…ACCUSED

¶28

THE STATE OF KARNATAKA REP. BY ITS SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF PANCHAYAT RAJ AND RURAL DEVELOPMENT, M.S.BUILDING, BENGALURU- 560 001

¶29

…PROFORMA PARTY

¶30

(BY SRI PRASHANT S. KUMMAN, ADVOCATE FOR R/A1 TO R/A3;

¶31

SRI MALLIKARJUN C. BASAREDDY, GA FOR R/A5; R/A4 IS SERVED)

¶32

THIS CCC IS FILED UNDER SECTIONS 11 AND 12 OF THE CONTEMPT OF COURTS ACT, PRAYING TO INITIATE CONTEMPT PROCEEDINGS AGAINST THE ACCUSED AND PUNISH THEM FOR SHOWING UTMOST DISRESPECT AND DISREGARD TO THE ORDER DATED 21.04.2022 PASSED BY THIS HONOURABLE COURT IN W.P.NO.200717/2017 AND PASS SUCH OTHER ORDERS, AS THIS HONOURABLE COURT DEEMD FIT, IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY.

¶33

THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, B.M. SHYAM PRASAD J., MADE THE FOLLOWING:

¶34

¶35

CCC No. 200204 of 2022

¶36

ORDER

¶37

This complaint is filed alleging disobedience of this Court’s direction in the complainant’s writ petition in W.P.No.200717/2017, which stands disposed of by order dated 21.04.2022. The writ Court’s direction in this order reads as under:

¶38

“ 4 In this case, it is noticed that no enquiry whatsoever is held before passing the order of dismissal. Under the circumstances this Court is of the opinion that the employee is entitled to 100% back wages without interest. Arrears shall be paid within three months from the date of receipt of the copy of this order.”

¶39

Presently, the second respondent’s affidavit is placed on record in continuation of the submissions made on the previous date. The second respondent, relying upon a copy of the Official Memorandum dated 06.03.2023, states on oath that the complainant’s appointment order is indeed issued by the Zilla Panchayat concerned but the dismissal order which is quashed by the writ Court in the aforesaid writ petition in W.P.No.200717/2017, is issued

¶40

¶41

CCC No. 200204 of 2022

¶42

by his office, and as such, the order of reinstatement under the Official Memorandum dated 06.03.2023 is issued for such reason. Crucially, the second respondent submits that the reinstatement vide the Official Memorandum dated 06.03.2023 cannot be temporary but is only subject to liberty as granted by the writ Court, and salary is being paid consequent to reinstatement.

¶43

This Court must opine that the petitioner’s appointment jeopardized by the order quashed in W.P.No.200717/2017 is restored vide the Official Memorandum dated 06.03.2023. There is substantial compliance, and the second respondent has tendered an unconditional apology. This Court does not find any reason to reject the apology tendered in ensuring this substantial compliance. As regards the direction to pay 100% back wages, Sri Prashant S. Kumman, the learned counsel for the second respondent, submits that an appeal is being contemplated, and such appeal would be filed within a week from today.

¶44

¶45

CCC No. 200204 of 2022

¶46

These circumstances are considered and the

¶47

contempt proceedings for the present stands dropped and with liberty to the complainant to revive these proceedings, either subject to outcome of the appeal now contemplated or if any such appeal is not filed within a reasonable time.

¶48

The application [I.A.No.2/2022] does not survive for consideration, accordingly same stands disposed of.

Sd/-

JUDGE

Sd/JUDGE

List No.: 1 Sl No.: 6

Santosh S/O Banudas Karbari v. the Chief Executive Officer and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Santosh S/O Banudas Karbari v. the Chief Executive Officer and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Basavaraju and Ors. Vs Syed Meer Anwar and Anr.

The Divisional Manager United India Insurance Co. Ltd., Vs Heenakousar and Ors.

Virupayya S/O Late Channabasayya Dead by Lrs Channabasayya Vs Channaveerayya and Ors.

Revamma Vs Shivanand

Shilubai W/O Nemappa Chavan and Ors. Vs the Branch Manager and Anr.

Smt.Sunita and Ors. Vs Basappa and Ors.