Allowed

Mr. Jerom D Souza v. Sri. Rajendra Kumar Kataria IAS

Karnataka HC23 Aug 2024CCC/207/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a contempt proceeding, the High Court held that the Revenue Department's constitution of a regularization committee constituted substantial compliance with previous directions. The Court directed the committee to decide the petitioner's application within two months, warning of aggravated contempt for further delay.

What did the court decide?

Complaint dismissed; accused directed to ensure the Committee considers the application within two months under threat of aggravated contempt.

Mr. Jerom D Souza Vs Sri. Rajendra Kumar Kataria IAS — Contempt of Court | Karnataka HC (2024)

¶1

¶2

NC: 2024:KHC:33997-DB CCC No. 207 of 2024

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 23^RD DAY OF AUGUST, 2024

¶4

PRESENT

¶5

THE HON'BLE MR. N. V. ANJARIA, CHIEF JUSTICE

¶6

AND

¶7

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K V ARAVIND CCC NO. 207 OF 2024 (CIVIL)

¶8

BETWEEN:

¶9

MR. JEROM D’ SOUZA

¶10

S/O LATE MANNUAL D’ SOUZA, AGED ABOUT 62 YEARS,

¶11

RESIDING AT KALLAI HOUSE,

¶12

HAREKALA VILLAGE, HAREKALA, MANGALURU TALUK D.K-574181.

¶13

…COMPLAINANT

¶14

(BY SRI Y RAJENDRA PRASAD SHETTY, ADVOCATE)

¶15

Digitally signed by PRABHAKAR SWETHA KRISHNAN

¶16

Location: High Court of Karnataka

¶17

AND:

¶18

SRI RAJENDRA KUMAR KATARIA, IAS

¶19

PRINCIPAL SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT OF KARNATAKA REVENUE DEPARTMENT, ROOM NO. 110 GATE NO. II M. S BUILDING,

¶20

¶21

NC: 2024:KHC:33997-DB CCC No. 207 of 2024

¶22

AMBEDKAR VEEDHI,

¶23

BENGALURU, KARNATAKA-560001.

¶24

...ACCUSED

¶25

THE STATE OF KARNATAKA

¶26

REPRESENTED BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY TO REVENUE DEPARTMENT M.S. BUILDING

¶27

BENGALURU-560 001

¶28

…PROFORMA RESPONDENT

¶29

(BY SMT. PRAMODHINI KISHAN, AGA FOR R2; R1-SERVED)

¶30

THIS CCC IS FILED UNDER SECTIONS 11 AND 12 OF THE CONTEMPT OF COURTS ACT, 1971, BY THE COMPLAINANT PRAYS THAT THE HON’BLE COURT BE PLEASED TO INITIATE THE CONTEMPT PROCEEDINGS AGAINST THE ACCUSED FOR HIS WILLFUL DISOBEDIENCE OF THE ORDER DATED 14/07/2023 PASSED IN WP NO.8836/2020 CONNECTED WITH WP NO.1663/2020 PASSED BY THE LEARNED SINGLE JUDGE OF THIS HON’BLE COURT AND PUNISH HIM FOR CONTEMPT OF COURT AS PER THE CONTEMPT OF COURT ACT, 1971.

¶31

THIS CONTEMPT PETITION COMING ON FOR ORDERS,

¶32

THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:

¶33

3 - NC: 2024:KHC:33997-DB CCC No. 207 of 2024

¶34

CORAM: HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR. JUSTICE N. V. ANJARIA and

¶35

HON'BLE MR JUSTICE K V ARAVIND

¶36

ORAL ORDER

¶37

(PER: HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR. JUSTICE N. V. ANJARIA)

¶38

The directions of learned Single Judge while disposing of the

¶39

writ petition requiring the competent authority of Revenue Department to constitute Committees for the purpose of dealing with the application filed for regularization of unauthorised occupation and cultivation. It was further directed that the Committees to be so formed shall consider the applications filed by the petitioners within stipulated time.

¶40

In the compliance affidavit filed by respondent No.1-the Principal Secretary, Revenue Department it is inter alia stated that the Regularization of Unauthorised Occupation Committee for Dakshina Kannada District has been constituted in exercise of powers under Section 94-A(1) of the Karnataka Land Revenue Act, 1964 as per the notification issued on 18.12.2023. The said

¶41

4 - NC: 2024:KHC:33997-DB CCC No. 207 of 2024

¶42

notification along with the translated copy figures on record (Annexure-R1 page 7). The next annexure to the compliance affidavit further indicates, as explained to the Court, that the notice was issued to the petitioner by such Committee.

¶43

The aforesaid facts stated by the Principal Secretary, Revenue Department in the compliance affidavit constitutes substantial compliance of the directions.

¶44

The only part left out is that the application of the petitioner was required to be considered within a period of six months from the date of constitution of the Committee. The Committee was constituted on 18.12.2023.

¶45

At this stage, learned advocate for the complainant submits that the decision is not taken.

¶46

While closing the contempt proceedings, on applying the doctrine of substantial compliance, it is provided that the necessary decision of the application of the petitioner shall be taken by the Committee within a period of two months from today, failing which, respondent No.1 will be exposed to the aggravated form of contempt.

¶47

NC: 2024:KHC:33997-DB CCC No. 207 of 2024

¶48

¶49

The petition is disposed of in the aforesaid terms.

¶50

Sd/(N. V. ANJARIA) CHIEF JUSTICE

¶51

Sd/(K V ARAVIND) JUDGE

¶52

KPS List No.: 1 Sl No.: 9

Mr. Jerom D Souza v. Sri. Rajendra Kumar Kataria IAS

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mr. Jerom D Souza v. Sri. Rajendra Kumar Kataria IAS

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

Smt. Jayamma Vs Smt. Sindhuja. L. D.

Smt T a Jagadamba Vs the Deputy Commissioner

State of Karnataka Vs Sri. H.S. Gajendra

Shivaganga Besthara Meenugarara Sahakara Sangha Niyamitha Vs the State of Karnataka

Sri Venkatarama Vs the State of Karnataka

Sri.M. Kumar Vs State of Karnataka