Skip to content

The research platform for Indian law — judgements, legislation and the citations between them. Free to search, with the original document behind every result.

A product of LawSathi.

Research

Search Legislation Research tools

Browse

Courts Case types Topics Most-cited judgements Sources

LawSathi

Practice platform Blog

© 2026 LawSathiTerms PrivacyResearch aid, not the official record.

Sri. Krishnoji Rao Vs Sri. Anil Kumar. T. K. — Contempt of Court | Karnataka HC (2025)

Home
Karnataka HC
2025
Sri. Krishnoji Rao Vs Sri. Anil Kumar. T. K.Sri. Krishnoji Rao v. Sri. Anil Kumar. T. K.

Disposed¶49

Sri. Krishnoji Rao v. Sri. Anil Kumar. T. K.

Karnataka HC8 Jan 2025CCC/1170/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

CCC No. 1170 of 2023, High Court of Karnataka (Bengaluruu), decided 08.01.2025 by K. Somashekar and Venkatesh Naik T, JJ. Civil contempt petition by Krishnoji Rao and five others (complainants) against Anil Kumar T.K. (Principal Secretary, Health & FW), K.M. Gayatri (CEO, Zilla Panchayath Mysore), Dr. Pushpalatha (Director, H&FW), P. Kumaraswamy (District Health Officer) and Government of Karnataka, alleging non-compliance with the order in W.P.No.1578/2023 dated 17.07.2023 requiring consideration of their representations. Compliance shown via affidavit dated 05.04.2024 and endorsement dated 17.11.2023 (Annexure-R1): D-Group appointment dated 03.06.2008, service from date of reporting per Condition No.4/agreement on Rs.20 stamp paper dated 11.06.2008, New Pension Scheme per G.O. dated 31.03.2006. Petition dropped; no punishment. Statute invoked: Sections 11 and 12, Contempt of Courts Act. No precedents cited.

What did the court decide?

None; contempt proceedings dropped as the Court recorded compliance with the order in W.P.No.1578/2023 — no punishment imposed on the accused. ¶49

Why is it important?

Having regard to the fact that the representations of the complainants were considered and an endorsement dated 17.11.2023 was issued in that regard (as borne out by the compliance affidavit dated 05.04.2024 of Accused No.2), the order of the learned Single Judge stands complied with; consequently the contempt petition does not survive for consideration and is dropped. ¶48-49

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

None; contempt proceedings dropped as the Court recorded compliance with the order in W.P.No.1578/2023 — no punishment imposed on the accused.

Issue for consideration

Whether Accused Nos.1 to 4 committed willful disobedience of the order passed in WP No.1578/2023 dated 17.07.2023 (Annexure-A), warranting initiation of contempt proceedings and punishment.

Court's answer

Having regard to the fact that the representations of the complainants were considered and an endorsement dated 17.11.2023 was issued in that regard (as borne out by the compliance affidavit dated 05.04.2024 of Accused No.2), the order of the learned Single Judge stands complied with; consequently the contempt petition does not survive for consideration and is dropped.

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Civil contempt under Sections 11 and 12 of the Contempt of Courts Act — alleged willful disobedience of the learned Single Judge's order in W.P.No.1578/2023 dated 17.07.2023 directing Respondent Nos.1 to 4 therein to consider the complainants' representations in accordance with law within eight weeks — State pressed compliance affidavit dated 05.04.2024 of Accused No.2 showing representations were considered and endorsement dated 17.11.2023 (Annexure-R1) issued, explaining that the complainants were appointed on 03.06.2008 as D-Group employees, that per Condition No.4 of the appointment order (and an agreement on Rs.20 stamp paper dated 11.06.2008) service counts only from the date of reporting, and that they fall under the New Pension Scheme per Government Order dated 31.03.2006 — Held, the Single Judge's order has been complied with; the contempt petition does not survive for consideration and is accordingly dropped. (Bench: K. Somashekar and Venkatesh Naik Ts, JJ.; order authored by K. Somashekar J.)

A

1 - NC: 2025:KHC:429-DB CCC No. 1170 of 2023

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

DATED THIS THE 8^TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2025

PRESENT

THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE K.SOMASHEKAR

AND

THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE VENKATESH NAIK T CIVIL CONTEMPT PETITION NO. 1170 OF 2023

BETWEEN:

SRI. KRISHNOJI RAO S/O. LATE ANNOJI RAO AGED ABOUT 64 YEARS R/AT NO. 522, MARIGUDI BEEDI HUNUSURU TOWN MYSURU DISTRICT-571 105.

Digitally signed by SUMATHY KANNAN Location: High Court of Karnataka

SMT. HONNAMMA W/O. LATE MAHADEVA AGED ABOUT 63 YEARS R/AT NO. 1031, KARIGOWDARA BEEDI HUNUSURU TOWN MYSURU DISTRICT-571 105.

SRI. SOMASHEKAR. A S/O. LATE APPAAJI CHAR AGED ABOUT 63 YEARS R/AT NO. 71/2, MLA ROAD KITTUR, KITTURU POST BETTAPURA HOBLI PIRIYAPATNA TALUK MYSURU DISTRICT-571 139.

SRI. RAJASHEKARA CHARI S/O. LATE RAJA CHARI AGED ABOUT 63 YEARS R/AT NO. 34/1, 1^ST MAIN ROAD 1ST CROSS, MACHOHALLI

2^ND STAGE, MUTTURAYA SWAMY LAYOUT

2 - NC: 2025:KHC:429-DB CCC No. 1170 of 2023

BAPA GRAMA BENGALURU-560 091.

SMT. SUNANDAMMA W/O. LATE SUBRAMANYA AGED ABOUT 63 YEARS R/AT NO. 1415, JLB ROAD MUSLIM BLOCK OPP CHURCH HUNSUR TOWN MYSURU DISTRICT-571 105.

SRI. SHIVARAME GOWDA S/O. LATE UGRE GOWDA AGED ABOUT 61 YEARS R/AT CHIKKAHANUSOGE GRAMA CHANNAMGERE POST CHUNCHUNKATTE HOBLI K.R. NAGARA TALUK MYSURU DISTRICT-571 105.

…COMPLAINANTS

(BY SRI.NAVEEN KUMAR - ADVOCATE FOR SMT. JYOTHI B KANGOKAR - ADVOCATE)

AND:

SRI. ANIL KUMAR. T. K. PRINCIPAL SECRETARY GOVERNMENT OF KARNATAKA HEALTH AND FAMILY WELFARE DEPARTMENT M.S. BUILDING, DR. AMBEDKAR VEEDHI BENGALURU-560 001.

SMT. K. M. GAYATRI THE CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER ZILLA PANCHAYATH, MYSORE, MYSURU DISTRICT-571 605.

DR. PUSHPALATHA THE DIRECTOR OF HEALTH AND FAMILY WELFARE DEPARTMENT ANAND RAO CIRCLE, BENGALURU-560 009.

3 - NC: 2025:KHC:429-DB CCC No. 1170 of 2023

SRI. P. KUMARASWAMY THE DISTRICT HEALTH OFFICER THE DISTRICT HEALTH AND FAMILY WELFARE DEPARTMENT

MYSORE DISTRICT-571 605.

THE GOVERNMENT OF KARNATAKA HEALTH AND FAMILY WELFARE DEPARTMENT M.S. BUILDING, DR. AMBEDKAR VEEDHI BENGALURU-560 001.

…ACCUSED

(BY SMT. NAMITHA MAHESH B G – AGA FOR ACCUSED NO.5; ACCUSED NOS.1 TO 4 ARE SERVED AND UNREPRESENTED)

THIS CCC IS FILED UNDER SECTIONS 11 AND 12 OF THE CONTEMPT OF COURTS ACT, PRAYING TO INITIATE CONTEMPT PROCEEDINGS AGAINST THE ACCUSED NO.1 TO 4 WILLFUL DISOBEDIENCE OF THE ORDER PASSED BY THIS HON’BLE COURT PASSED IN WP NO.1578/2023 DATED 17.07.2023 AT ANNEXURE-A AND PUNISH THEM.

THIS CCC, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:

CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE K.SOMASHEKAR AND HON'BLE MR JUSTICE VENKATESH NAIK T

ORAL ORDER

(PER: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE K.SOMASHEKAR)

This contempt petition is filed by the complainant against the respondent / authority in view of

4 - NC: 2025:KHC:429-DB CCC No. 1170 of 2023

non-compliance of the order passed by a learned Single Judge of this Court in W.P.No.1578/2023 dated 17.07.2023 vide Annexure-“A”.

By the said order, the learned Single Judge had directed Respondent Nos.1 to 4 therein to consider the representations of petitioners therein / complainants herein in accordance with law, within an outer limit of eight weeks from the date of receipt of the said order.

Learned counsel Smt. Jyothi B. Kangokar who is on record for complainants, is represented by the learned counsel Shri Naveen Kumar, who is present before Court. Learned AGA who represents the respondents / accused, presses into service consideration of the Compliance affidavit dated 05.04.2024 filed by Accused No.2. The said affidavit consists of Paragraph Nos.1 to 7. Paragraph 4 of the said affidavit reveals that the representations of the complainants have been considered and in compliance thereof, the Authority has issued an endorsement dated 17.11.2023 vide Annexure-“R1”. In the said

5 - NC: 2025:KHC:429-DB CCC No. 1170 of 2023

endorsement, it is specifically stated that the Petitioners / Complainants have been appointed on 03.06.2008 as D-Group employees and as per Condition No.4 of the appointment order, their service would be counted only from the date of reporting, in respect of which the petitioners have also executed an agreement on Rs.20/Stamp Paper on 11.06.2008. Further, they would come under New Pension Scheme as per the Government Order dated 31.03.2006. There is no due to the petitioner from the Government and it is also explained in the endorsement that the complainant / Sri. Krishnoji Rao joined Government service on 11.06.2008 and he would also come under the New Pension Scheme. Further, the petitioners / complainants have been explained all aspects of the endorsement which has been issued to them. Hence, it is submitted that the order of the learned Single Judge has been duly complied with.

Therefore, having regard to the fact that the

representations of complainants have been considered and

NC: 2025:KHC:429-DB CCC No. 1170 of 2023

6 -

an endorsement dated 17.11.2023 has been issued in that

regard, this contempt petition does not survive for

consideration and accordingly it is hereby dropped.

Sd/(K.SOMASHEKAR) JUDGE

Sd/(VENKATESH NAIK T) JUDGE

KS

Issues for consideration

1 issue framed by the court

AI extract

1.
Whether Accused Nos.1 to 4 committed willful disobedience of the order passed in WP No.1578/2023 dated 17.07.2023 (Annexure-A), warranting initiation of contempt proceedings and punishment.¶31
The court held
Having regard to the fact that the representations of the complainants were considered and an endorsement dated 17.11.2023 was issued in that regard (as borne out by the compliance affidavit dated 05.04.2024 of Accused No.2), the order of the learned Single Judge stands complied with; consequently the contempt petition does not survive for consideration and is dropped.ratio¶48-49

Statutes considered

1 provisions across 1 enactments

AI extract

Contempt of Courts Act11 and 12¶31

Procedural history

How this case reached the court

AI extract

Prior proceeding
Order passed by a learned Single Judge of this Court in W.P.No.1578/2023 dated 17.07.2023 (Annexure-A), alleged to have been disobeyed.¶38
Prior proceeding
Direction in the W.P. order: Respondent Nos.1 to 4 therein were to consider the representations of the petitioners (complainants herein) in accordance with law.¶39
Prior proceeding
Compliance affidavit dated 05.04.2024 filed by Accused No.2 pressed into service by the State.¶40
Prior proceeding
Per Paragraph 4 of the compliance affidavit, the complainants' representations were considered and an endorsement dated 17.11.2023 (Annexure-R1) was issued in compliance.¶40
Prior proceeding
Contents of endorsement Annexure-R1: complainants appointed 03.06.2008 as D-Group employees; per Condition No.4 of the appointment order service counted only from date of reporting (agreement executed on Rs.20 stamp paper on 11.06.2008).¶42
Prior proceeding
Endorsement further stated the complainants come under the New Pension Scheme per Government Order dated 31.03.2006, and that Sri. Krishnoji Rao joined Government service on 11.06.2008.¶42

Parties & counsel

AI extract

petitioner
SRI. KRISHNOJI RAO S/O. LATE ANNOJI RAO¶9
SRI. NAVEEN KUMAR, SMT. JYOTHI B. KANGOKAR
petitioner
SMT. HONNAMMA W/O. LATE MAHADEVA¶11
SRI. NAVEEN KUMAR, SMT. JYOTHI B. KANGOKAR
petitioner
SRI. SOMASHEKAR. A S/O. LATE APPAAJI CHAR¶12
SRI. NAVEEN KUMAR, SMT. JYOTHI B. KANGOKAR
petitioner
SRI. RAJASHEKARA CHARI S/O. LATE RAJA CHARI¶13
SRI. NAVEEN KUMAR, SMT. JYOTHI B. KANGOKAR
petitioner
SMT. SUNANDAMMA W/O. LATE SUBRAMANYA¶17
SRI. NAVEEN KUMAR, SMT. JYOTHI B. KANGOKAR
petitioner
SRI. SHIVARAME GOWDA S/O. LATE UGRE GOWDA¶18
SRI. NAVEEN KUMAR, SMT. JYOTHI B. KANGOKAR
respondent
SRI. ANIL KUMAR. T. K., PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, GOVERNMENT OF KARNATAKA, HEALTH AND FAMILY WELFARE DEPARTMENT¶22
respondent
SMT. K. M. GAYATRI, THE CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER, ZILLA PANCHAYATH, MYSORE¶23
respondent
DR. PUSHPALATHA, THE DIRECTOR OF HEALTH AND FAMILY WELFARE DEPARTMENT¶24
respondent
SRI. P. KUMARASWAMY, THE DISTRICT HEALTH OFFICER, DISTRICT HEALTH AND FAMILY WELFARE DEPARTMENT, MYSORE¶26
respondent
THE GOVERNMENT OF KARNATAKA, HEALTH AND FAMILY WELFARE DEPARTMENT¶28
SMT. NAMITHA MAHESH B G

Coram

AI extract

K. Somashekarauthor¶35
Venkatesh Naik Tmember¶33

Case details

As recorded by the court registry

Court: Karnataka HC
Decided on: 8 Jan 2025 · January
Registered: 27 Nov 2023
Case no.: CCC/1170/2023
CNR: KAHC010623012023
Topic: Contempt of Court
Bench: K.somashekar Venkatesh Naik T
Disposal: DROPPED
Case type: CCC

Similar cases

Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court

Finding judgements on the same questions…

More from K.somashekar Venkatesh Naik T

Sri Paramesha Vs Smt Gayithri I a S
7 Jan 2025
Mrs. Mary Lalithraj Vs Mr. B. Mariraj
7 Jan 2025
Sri Gajendra Kumar R Vs State of Karnataka
7 Jan 2025
Mr K S Ameer Jan Vs Sri Prabhulinga Kavalikatti
8 Jan 2025
G.S. Pradeep Raj Vs State of Karnataka
8 Jan 2025
I.S.R. Workers Union Vs Mr.P.S. Krishnamurthy
9 Jan 2025

Cite this judgement

Sri. Krishnoji Rao v. Sri. Anil Kumar. T. K., CCC/1170/2023 (KA), decided on 8 January 2025.

The High Court of Karnataka publishes no neutral citation for this judgement — cite it by case number and date of decision.

Statutes1

Contempt of Courts Act11 and 12

View all statutes

Procedural history6

Order passed by a learned Single Judge of this Court in W.P.No.1578/2023 dated 17.07.2023 (Annexure-A), alleged to have been disobeyed.
Direction in the W.P. order: Respondent Nos.1 to 4 therein were to consider the representations of the petitioners (complainants herein) in accordance with law.

View full history

Bench / Coram

K. Somashekar and Venkatesh Naik T

Parties & counsel