Shobha C Vs Vineet Pandey

SHOBHA C D/O CHANDRA NAIK G AGED ABOUT 36 YEARS RESIDENT OF NO.684/15 10TH CROSS, MANGALWARPETE CHANNAPATNA 562160 WORKING AS ASSISTANT SUPERINTENDENT OF POST OFFICES (HQ) CHANNAPATNA DIVISION CHANNAPATNA 562160.

¶13

…COMPLAINANT

¶14

(BY MS. SHOBHA C – PARTY-IN-PERSON)

¶15

AND:

¶16

VINEET PANDEY SECRETARY POSTS DEPARTMENT OF POSTS MINISTRY OF COMMUNICATION AND IT (UNION OF INDIA) DAKBHAVAN, SANDAD MARG NEW DELHI 110001.

¶17

RAJENDRA KUMAR S THE CHIEF POSTMASTER GENERAL KARNATAKA CIRCLE, PALACE ROAD BANGALORE 560001.

¶18

2 - NC: 2025:KHC:1957-DB CCC No. 984 of 2023

¶19

L K DASH THE POSTMASTER GENERAL BENGALURU REGION PALACE ROAD. BANGALORE 560001.

¶20

NAGASHAYANA THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POST OFFICES CHANNAPATNA DIVISION CHANNAPATNA 562160.

¶21

TARA V CHAIRPERSON THE INTERNAL COMPLAINTS COMMITTEE BENGALURU H Q REGION APMG (BD AND MAILS), O/O CPMG KARNATAKA CIRCLE BENGALURU 560001.

¶22

…ACCUSED

¶23

(BY SRI. M N KUMAR, CENTRAL GOVERNMENT SENIOR PANEL COUNSEL)

¶24

THIS CCC IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 215 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA AND UNDER SECTIONS 11 AND 12 OF THE CONTEMPT OF COURTS ACT, 1971, PRAYING TO TAKE COGNIZANCE OF THE CONTEMPT COMMITTED BY THE ACCUSED OR RESPONDENTS FOR HAVING WILLFULLY DISOBEYED THE DIRECTIONS IN TERMS OF THE ORDER PASSED BY THIS HON’BLE COURT ON 30.08.2023 VIDE ANNEXURE-A IN W.P.NO.17946/2023 AND INITIATE CONTEMPT PROCEEDINGS AGAINST THE ACCUSED

¶25

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

¶26

3 - NC: 2025:KHC:1957-DB CCC No. 984 of 2023

¶27

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

¶28

ORAL ORDER

¶29

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

¶30

This contempt proceedings is initiated by the

¶31

complainant – party in person for disobedience of the interim direction issued by the learned single Judge in W.P.No.17946/2023 dated 30.08.2023 as per Annexure-A.

¶32

Heard Ms.Shobha, complainant – party in person and Sri M.N.Kumar, CGC for Accused Nos.2 to 4. The learned single Judge in the aforesaid writ petition had restrained the respondents from taking any action against the petitioner pursuant to recommendation at Annexure-A till the next date of hearing.

¶33

In the meanwhile of recording the status, learned counsel Sri M.N.Kumar for accused Nos.2 to 4 submits that reply affidavits of the accused under Rule 10(i) of the High Court of Karnataka (Contempt of Court Proceedings) Rules, 1981 have been filed. The submission is taken on record.

¶34

4 - NC: 2025:KHC:1957-DB CCC No. 984 of 2023

¶35

Keeping in view the submission made by

¶36

complainant-party in person and so also, counsel for the accused, it is relevant to refer an order rendered by the Co-ordinate Bench of this Court in CCC.No.1237/2022 (Civil) dated 26.03.2023 wherein para No.3 of the said order reads thus:

¶37

“3. When the order is an interim order, by its very nature it does not determine rights of the parties finally. There are no trappings of finality in the order. In the aforesaid view, this Court is not inclined to entertain the contempt petition and it is not persuaded to exercise the power of contempt under the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971.”’

¶38

Similar issue was also decided by a co-ordinate

¶39

Bench of this Court in CCC.No.703/2024 (Civil) dated

¶40

06.08.2024 wherein at Para No. 2 of the said order it has been observed thus:

¶41

“ 2. This Court is not inclined to invoke and exercise the jurisdiction under the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971, in view that the petitioner has the remedy to approach the same Court for breach of injunction under the provisions of Order XXXIX Rule 2A of the Code of Civil Procedure 1908.’

¶42

5 - NC: 2025:KHC:1957-DB CCC No. 984 of 2023

¶43

It is further relevant to refer to the decision of the

¶44

Hon’ble Supreme Court of India in Jhareswar Prasad

¶45

Paul v. Tarak Nath Ganguly reported in (2002) 5 SCC

¶46

352 wherein at paragraph No.11 it is observed as under:

¶47

‘11. The purpose of contempt jurisdiction is to uphold the majesty and dignity of the courts of law, since the respect and authority commanded by the courts of law are the greatest guarantee to an ordinary citizen and the democratic fabric of society will suffer if respect for the judiciary is undermined. The Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 has been introduced under the statute for the purpose of securing the feeling of confidence of the people in general for true and proper administration of justice in the country. The power to punish for contempt of court is a special power vested under the Constitution in the courts of record and also under the statute. The power is special and needs to be exercised with care and caution. It should be used sparingly by the courts on being satisfied regarding the true effect of contemptuous conduct. It is to be kept in mind that the court exercising the jurisdiction to punish for contempt does not function as an original or appellate court for determination of the disputes between the parties. The contempt jurisdiction should be confined to the question whether there has been any deliberate disobedience of the order of the court and if the conduct of the party who is alleged to have committed such disobedience is contumacious. The court exercising contempt

¶48

6 -

¶49

NC: 2025:KHC:1957-DB CCC No. 984 of 2023

¶50

jurisdiction is not entitled to enter into questions which have not been dealt with and decided in the judgment or order, violation of which is alleged by the applicant. The court has to consider the direction issued in the judgment or order and not to consider the question as to what the judgment or order should have contained. At the cost of repetition, be it stated here that the court exercising contempt jurisdiction is primarily concerned with the question of contumacious conduct of the party, which is alleged to have committed deliberate default in complying with the directions in the judgment or order. If the judgment or order does not contain any specific direction regarding a matter or if there is any ambiguity in the directions issued therein then it will be better to direct the parties to approach the court which disposed of the matter for clarification of the order instead of the court exercising contempt jurisdiction taking upon itself the power to decide the original proceeding in a manner not dealt with by the court passing the judgment or order. If this limitation is borne in mind then criticisms which are sometimes levelled against the courts exercising contempt of court jurisdiction “that it has exceeded its powers in granting substantive relief and issuing a direction regarding the same without proper adjudication of the dispute” in its entirety can be avoided. This will also avoid multiplicity of proceedings because the party which is prejudicially affected by the judgment or order passed in the contempt proceeding and granting relief and issuing fresh directions is likely to challenge that order and that may give rise to another round of litigation arising from a proceeding

¶51

7 - NC: 2025:KHC:1957-DB CCC No. 984 of 2023

¶52

which is intended to maintain the majesty and image of courts.’

¶53

Keeping in view the aforesaid reliances, it can be gathered that, disobedience of interim order granted in a petition, would not amount to contempt of court in view of the fact that the same has not attained finality. Hence, the present contempt proceedings does not survive for consideration. Accordingly, it is dropped. However, liberty is granted to the complainant to proceed further in accordance with law.

¶54

Pending applications, if any, shall stand disposed of.

¶55

SD/(K.SOMASHEKAR) JUDGE

¶56

SD/(VENKATESH NAIK T) JUDGE

¶57

DKB

Shobha C v. Vineet Pandey

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Shobha C v. Vineet Pandey

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sri G C Umesh Vs the State of Karnataka

P J Chandrashekhar Vs Naveen Ballal

Pushpa Vs P Pramila

Mr C K Thomas Vs Mrs Gowramma

Vinoth Kumar S Vs Sri Maruthi B

Sri.Kenchappa Vs Sri.Mallikarjuna