The Court briefly considered a contempt petition alleging willful disobedience of a prior order directing compassionate appointment consideration. It upheld that compliance reports cannot be critically examined in contempt jurisdiction and dismissed the petition.
Contempt petition dismissed. Notice discharged. Costs made easy.
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.
NC: 2023:KHC:40301-DB CCC No. 885 of 2023
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 10TH DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2023
PRESENT
THE HON'BLE MR PRASANNA B. VARALE, CHIEF JUSTICE
AND
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE KRISHNA S DIXIT
CIVIL CONTEMPT PETITION NO. 885 OF 2023
BETWEEN:
SRI. DIWAKAR J, S/O LATE SHASHIKALA VETRISELVI, AGED ABOUT 32 YEARS, R/AT NO.1303, 1ST CROSS ROAD, PIPE LINE, ROBERSONPET, KGF, KOLAR-563 122.
…COMPLAINANT
(BY SRI. M.V.V. RAMAMNA, ADVOCATE FOR SRI. SANDHYA U PRABHU.,ADVOCATE)
AND:
Digitally signed by SHARADA VANI B Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
SRI. ANAND V GANGUR, ASSISTANT GENERAL MANAGER (HR), STATE BANK OF INDIA, LOCAL HEAD OFFICE, ST MARKS ROAD, BANGALORE-560 025.
…ACCUSED
(BY SRI. TULSI KUMAR B.N..,ADVOCATE)
THIS CCC IS FILED UNDER SECTIONS 11 AND 12 OF THE CONTEMPT OF COURTS ACT, PRAYING TO PUNISH THE ACCUSED FOR GROSS DISOBEDIENCE OF THE ORDER IN W.P. NO.19831/2017 PASSED BY THIS HONBLE COURT ON 31.3.2023 PRODUCED AT ANNEXURE-C.
THIS CCC COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, CHIEF JUSTICE MADE THE FOLLOWING:
ORDER
This complaint alleges violation of learned Single Judge’s order dated 31.03.2023 entered in complainant’s W.P.No.19831/2017 (S-Res) whereby the respondentbank was directed to pass appropriate orders on his application for compassionate appointment “ in accordance with law taking into consideration the law declared by Hon’ble Apex Court …. within an outer limit of eight weeks…”.
the law declared by the Apex Court in MUNISH KUMAR
vs. STATE OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, (2020) 20 SCC
394 , and other decisions have not been adhered to and
therefore that demonstrates prima facie willful
disobedience of the order.
NC: 2023:KHC:40301-DB CCC No. 885 of 2023
In the above circumstances, this contempt petition is
dismissed reserving liberty to the complainant to assail the subject ‘SPEAKING ORDER’ elsewhere in accordance with
law, if he is so advised. Notice is discharged.
Costs made easy.
Sd/CHIEF JUSTICE
Sd/JUDGE
cbc
List No.: 2 Sl No.: 4
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the passage of a speaking order negating a compassionate appointment application amounts to willful disobedience of this Court’s prior order.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Munish Kumar vs. State of Himachal PradeshReferred¶26
MUNISH KUMAR vs. STATE OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, (2020) 20 SCC 394 · Who else cites this
2 provisions across 1 enactments
PRASANNA B. VARALE
KRISHNA S DIXIT
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
