Mr T J Mathew Vs State of Karnataka — Contempt of Court | Karnataka HC (2025)

Mr T J Mathew Vs State of Karnataka — Contempt of Court | Karnataka HC (2025)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Contempt proceedings dropped; complainant reserved liberty to proceed with the matter in accordance with law.

Issue for consideration

Whether, in view of the compliance affidavit dated 27.10.2022 and endorsement dated 18.10.2022 filed by Accused No.2 (Tahsildar, Kadaba Taluk), the present contempt proceedings survive for consideration.

Court's answer

Since the Authority (Accused No.2 / Tahsildar) has complied with the order of the learned Single Judge — as shown by the compliance affidavit dated 27.10.2022 and the endorsement dated 18.10.2022 produced as Annexure-R1 — the present contempt proceedings do not survive for consideration, and the contempt petition is hereby dropped.

Key takeaways

However, the complainant, if aggrieved, is reserved liberty to proceed with the matter in accordance with law.obiter¶39

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Civil Contempt Petition CCC No.618 of 2022 (High Court of Karnataka at Bengaluru, 15 January 2025; bench: Hon'ble Mr Justice K.Somashekar, author, and Hon'ble Mr Justice Venkatesh Naik T): filed under Sections 11 and 12 of the Contempt of Courts Act r/w Article 215 of the Constitution of India by Mr T J Mathew (s/o T E M Joseph), complainant, represented by Sri Karunakara P, against the State of Karnataka, Department of Panchayat Raj and Rural Development (Accused No.1) and Mr Anantha Shankar, Tahsildar, Kadaba Taluk, Dakshina Kannada (Accused No.2, served and unrepresented), alleging non-compliance with the order dated 29.03.2022 of a learned Single Judge in W.P.No.6910/2022 (LBUC) (Annexure-A), whereby the Tahsildar had been directed, within eight weeks, to act on the complainant's representation dated 07.10.2021 concerning unauthorized construction at the Sarkari Paramboku of the river. The AGA (Smt Namitha Mahesh B G) produced the Tahsildar's compliance affidavit dated 27.10.2022 together with his endorsement dated 18.10.2022 (Annexure-R1), stating that the file regarding grant of Hakku Patra had been forwarded to the Office of the Deputy Commissioner and that, an appeal being under investigation with an interim order of stay granted, the complainant's application dated 07.10.2021 could not then be considered but would be considered after the Deputy Commissioner's final judgment in accordance with law. Holding (Per Hon'ble Mr Justice K.Somashekar): as the Authority had complied with the Single Judge's order, the contempt proceedings did not survive for consideration and the contempt petition was dropped, with liberty reserved to the complainant, if aggrieved, to proceed with the matter in accordance with law.

1 -

NC: 2025:KHC:1427-DB CCC No. 618 of 2022

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

DATED THIS THE 15^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. 618 OF 2022

BETWEEN:

MR T J MATHEW S/O T E M JOSEPH AGED ABOUT 66 YEARS ALMADE HOUSE, SHIRADI TALUK AND POST, KADABA TALUK DAKSHINA KANNADA DISTRICT-574221.

…COMPLAINANT

(BY SRI. KARUNAKARA P - ADVOCATE)

AND:

Digitally signed by SUMATHY KANNAN

Location: High Court of Karnataka

STATE OF KARNATAKA PANCHAYAT RAJ AND RURAL DEVELOPMENT VIDHANA SOUDHA, BENGALURU.

MR. ANANTHA SHANKAR TAHSILDAR KADABA , KADABA TALUK DAKSHINA KANNADA - 574221.

…ACCUSED

(BY SMT. NAMITHA MAHESH B G – AGA FOR ACCUSED NO.1; ACCUSED NO.2 IS SERVED AND UNREPRESENTED)

THIS CCC IS FILED UNDER SECTIONS 11 AND 12 OF THE CONTEMPT OF COURTS ACT R/W ARTICLE 215 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO SECURE THE PRESENCE OF THE ACCUSED PERSONS AND INITIATE APPROPRIATE CONTEMPT PROCEEDINGS AGAINST ACCUSED AND PUNISH THE ACCUSED NO.3 FOR NOT OBEYING THE

2 -

NC: 2025:KHC:1427-DB CCC No. 618 of 2022

ORDER OF THIS HON’BLE COURT IN W.P.NO.6910/2022(LBUC) PRODUCE AT ANNEXURE-A.

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 non-compliance of the order passed by a learned Single Judge of this Court in W.P.No.6910/2022 dated 29.03.2022 vide Annexure-“A”.

By the said order, the learned Single Judge while disposing of the petition, had directed the second accused herein / Tahsildar to take action against the representation dated 07.10.2021 of the complainant as regards unauthorized construction at the Sarkari Paramboku of the river in question within a period of eight weeks from the date of the said order.

3 - NC: 2025:KHC:1427-DB CCC No. 618 of 2022

Heard the learned counsel Shri Karunakara P for

the complainant as well as the learned AGA for Accused No.2 / Tahsildar.

The learned AGA seeks for consideration of compliance affidavit dated 27.10.2022 filed by Accused No.2 being the Tahsildar, Kadaba Taluk, Dakshina Kannada. At paragraph 3 of the said affidavit, the Tahsildar has stated that in pursuance of the order of the learned Single Judge, he had issued an endorsement dated 18.10.2022 stating that the file with regard to grant of Hakku Patra is forwarded to the Office of the Deputy Commissioner and since the appeal is under investigation and the Court has granted an interim order of stay, the application of the complainant dated 07.10.2021 could not be considered at this stage. It is further stated that after the final judgment of the Court of the Deputy Commissioner, the application of the complainant would be considered in accordance with law. A copy of the said endorsement dated 18.10.2022 is produced and marked

4 - NC: 2025:KHC:1427-DB CCC No. 618 of 2022

as Annexure-“R1”. Hence, it is submitted that the Tahsildar has complied with the order passed by the learned Single Judge. In view of the Authority having complied with the order of the learned Single Judge, learned AGA prays to drop the proceedings as against the respondents.

Therefore, keeping in view the submission of the

learned AGA, the present contempt proceedings do not survive for consideration. In view of the same, the contempt petition is hereby dropped.

However, the complainant if aggrieved, is reserved

liberty to proceed with the matter, in accordance with law.

SD/(K.SOMASHEKAR) JUDGE

SD/(VENKATESH NAIK T) JUDGE

KS