Karnataka State Minorities Commission Vs Anthony Vedar… — Contempt of Court | Karnataka HC (2025)

Karnataka State Minorities Commission Vs Anthony Vedar… — Contempt of Court | Karnataka HC (2025)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Both writ appeals (W.A. No.1282/2023 and W.A. No.1526/2023) dismissed; Single Judge's salary direction upheld, limited to the period up to 09.03.2010 when the respondent demitted office. Cross objection (W.A. CROB No.5/2025) seeking 12% interest disposed of — no interest awarded, but Rs.15,000/- costs granted to the respondent/writ petitioner as compensation. C.C.C. No.81/2024: impugned order dated 07.09.2023 to be complied with within two months, failing which liberty to file a fresh contempt petition; contempt proceedings dropped.

Issue for consideration

Whether the learned Single Judge's direction to pay the respondent/writ petitioner salary at the rate applicable to a Member of the Karnataka Public Service Commission was sustainable, or stood vitiated as per incuriam for ignoring the allowances Rule (Annexure-E, Notification dated 24.09.2010) framed for Members of the appellant-Commission. +2 more

Court's answer

Annexure-E Notification was issued only on 24.09.2010 and is apparently prospective in nature; therefore the contention that the Single Judge's direction was per incuriam and rendered without considering Annexure-E cannot be accepted.

Ratio / Principle

No grounds to interfere with the judgment of the learned Single Judge, except that since the respondent/writ petitioner admittedly demitted office on 09.03.2010, the amount payable would only be till that date; the writ appeals are dismissed.

Key takeaways

This is not a fit case for grant of interest for the delayed payment; however, to compensate the respondent/writ petitioner for awaiting payment for a considerable length of time, Rs.15,000/- is ordered as costs payable to him; the cross objection is disposed of accordingly.ratio¶123
In C.C.C. No.81/2024, the impugned order dated 07.09.2023 in W.P.No.58289/2016 is to be complied with within two months; with that direction the contempt proceedings are dropped, with liberty to file a fresh contempt petition if the order is not complied with within two months.ratio¶127

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Writ Appeals (W.A. Nos.1282/2023 and 1526/2023) and Cross Objection (W.A. CROB No.5/2025) against the order dated 07.09.2023 of the learned Single Judge in W.P.No.58289/2016 (GM-RES), which directed payment to an Ex-Member of the Karnataka State Minorities Commission of salary at the rates applicable to a Member of the Karnataka Public Service Commission (Rs.31,000/- p.m. for 25.02.2009–31.07.2009 and Rs.70,000/- p.m. from 01.08.2009 onwards): Held, dismissing the appeals — (i) the respondent admittedly served as Member from 25.02.2009 to 09.03.2010, and it was not in dispute that no salary/emoluments of Members of the appellant-Commission had been prescribed as on 09.03.2010; (ii) Annexure-E Notification dated 24.09.2010 substituting Rule 4 of the Karnataka State Minorities Commission Rules, 2000 (sitting fee of Rs.1,000 per sitting capped at Rs.20,000 p.m., Rs.5,000 p.m. other allowances) was issued only on 24.09.2010 and is apparently prospective; hence the plea that the Single Judge's direction was per incuriam was rejected; (iii) payment confined to the period up to 09.03.2010, when the respondent demitted office. Cross Objection claiming 12% interest on delayed payment: declined as not a fit case, but Rs.15,000/- costs awarded as compensation; cross objection disposed of (precedent relied on by counsel — State of A.P. v. Dinavahi Lakshmi Kameswari, C.A. No.399/2021, decided 08.02.2021 — considered but not followed on facts). C.C.C. No.81/2024 under Sections 11 and 12 of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 alleging disobedience of the order dated 07.09.2023: compliance directed within two months, failing which liberty to file fresh contempt; contempt proceedings dropped. Bench: Anu Sivaraman and Vijaykumar A. Patil, JJ.; opinion by Anu Sivaraman, J.

1 -

NC: 2025:KHC:52318-DB W.A. No.1282/2023 AND CONNECTED WITH MATTERS

HC-KAR

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 10^TH DAY OF DECEMBER, 2025

PRESENT

THE HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE ANU SIVARAMAN

AND

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIJAYKUMAR A. PATIL WRIT APPEAL NO.1282/2023 (GM-RES)

C/W

CIVIL CONTEMPT PETITION NO.81/2024 WRIT APPEAL NO.1526/2023 (GM-RES)

WRIT APPEAL CROB NO.5/2025

IN W.A. No.1282/2023:

BETWEEN:

KARNATAKA STATE MINORITIES COMMISSION BY ITS SECRETARY, 5TH FLOOR Digitally signed VISVESWARAIAH TOWER by ARSHIFA BANGALORE-560001. BAHAR KHANAM Location: High Court Of (BY SRI. ZAMEER PASHA, ADV.,) Karnataka

…APPELLANT

AND:

ANTHONY VEDAR FERNANDEZ S/O VEDAR FERNANDEZ AGED ABOUT 44 YEARS EX-MEMBER KARNATAKA STATE MINORITIES COMMISSION BRAHMANA MANCHALAYA SAGAR TALUK SHIMOGA DISTRICT-577401.

2 -

NC: 2025:KHC:52318-DB W.A. No.1282/2023

AND CONNECTED WITH MATTERS

HC-KAR

STATE OF KARNATAKA

REP. BY ITS SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT MINORITY WELFARE DEPARTMENT VIKASA SOUDHA DR. B.R. AMBEDKAR VEEDHI BANGALORE-560001.

…RESPONDENTS

(BY SMT. YUKTH ANIL, ADV., FOR SRI. T.N. VISHWANATHA, ADV., FOR C/R1 SMT. MAMATHA SHETTY, AGA FOR R2)

THIS WRIT APPEAL IS FILED U/S 4 OF THE KARNATAKA HIGH COURT ACT, PRAYING TO CALL FOR THE RECORDS IN WRIT PETITION NO.58289/2016. ISSUE AN ORDER OR DIRECTION SETTING ASIDE THE IMPUGNED ORDER DATED 07/09/2023 IN WRIT PETITION NO.58289/2016 & ETC.

IN C.C.C. NO.81/2024:

BETWEEN:

ANTHONY VEDAR FERNANDEZ S/O VEDAR FERNANDEZ AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS EX-MEMBER KARNATAKA MINORITY COMMISSION BRAHMANA MANCHALAYA SAGAR TALUK SHIMOGA DISTRICT 577 401.

...COMPLAINANT

(BY SMT. YUKTH ANIL, ADV., FOR SRI. T.N. VISHWANATHA, ADV.,)

AND:

SRI. MANOZ JAIN SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT MINORITY WELFARE DEPARTMENT

3 - NC: 2025:KHC:52318-DB W.A. No.1282/2023 AND CONNECTED WITH MATTERS

HC-KAR

VIKASA SOUDHA

DR. B.R. AMBEDKAR VEEDHI BENGALURU 560 001.

SMT. SALMA FIRDOSE SECRETARY KARNATAKA STATE MINORITY COMMISSION 5th FLOOR, VISHVESHWARAIAH TOWER BENGALURU 560 001.

ALSO AT Ist FLOOR, K M D C BHAVAN NO.39-181, SUBEDAR CHATRAM ROAD SHESHADRIPURAM BENGALURU 560 001.

...ACCUSED

STATE OF KARNATAKA REPT. BY ITS CHIEF SECRETARY VIDHANA SOUDHA DR. AMBEDKAR VEEDHI BENGALURU - 56001.

…. PROFORMA RESPONDENT

(BY SMT. MAMATHA SHETTY, AGA FOR PROFORMA R3 & A1 SRI. ZAMEER PASHA, ADV., FOR A2)

THIS CCC IS FILED UNDER SECTION 11 AND 12 OF THE CONTEMPT OF COURTS ACT, 1971, PRAYING TO INITIATE CONTEMPT OF COURT PROCEEDINGS AGAINST THE ACCUSED OFFICERS FOR HAVING WILLFULLY DISOBEYED THE ORDER DATED 07.09.2023 PASSED BY THIS HONBLE COURT IN W.P.NO.58289/2016 (GM-RES) AND THE ACCUSED MAY BE PUNISHED UNDER SECTION 12 OF THE CONTEMPT OF COURTS ACT, 1971 BY ALLOWING THIS CONTEMPT PETITION IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY & ETC.

4 -

NC: 2025:KHC:52318-DB W.A. No.1282/2023

AND CONNECTED WITH MATTERS

HC-KAR

IN W.A. NO.1526/2023:

BETWEEN:

THE STATE OF KARNATAKA REP. BY ITS SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT MINORITY WELFARE DEPARTMENT VIKASA SOUDHA DR. B.R. AMBEDKAR VEEDHI BENGALURU-560001.

...APPELLANT

(BY SMT. MAMATHA SHETTY, AGA)

AND:

SRI. ANTHONY VEDAR FERNANDEZ S/O VEDAR FERNANDEZ AGED ABOUT 44 YEARS EX-MEMBER KARNATAKA MINORITY COMMISSION BRAHMANA MANCHALAYA SAGAR TALUK SHIMOGA DISTRICT-577401.

KARNATAKA STATE MINORITY COMMISSION BY ITS SECRETARY 5TH FLOOR, VISVESWARAIAH TOWER BENGALURU-560001. ...RESPONDENTS (BY SMT. YUKTH ANIL, ADV., FOR SRI. T.N. VISHWANATHA, ADV., FOR C/R1 SRI. ZAMEER PASHA, ADV., FOR R2)

THIS WRIT APPEAL IS FILED U/S 4 OF THE KARNATAKA HIGH COURT ACT PRAYING TO CALL FOR RECORDS. ALLOW THE WRIT APPEAL AND SET ASIDE THE ORDER DATED 07.09.2023 PASSED BY THE LEARNED SINGLE JUDGE OF THIS HON'BLE COURT IN WRIT PETITION No.58289/2016 (GM-RES), IN THE INTEREST OF

5 -

NC: 2025:KHC:52318-DB W.A. No.1282/2023 AND CONNECTED WITH MATTERS

HC-KAR

JUSTICE AND EQUITY.

IN W.A. CROB NO.5/2025:

BETWEEN:

SRI. ANTHONY VEDAR FERNANDEZ SON OF VEDAR FERNANDEZ AGED ABOUT 46 YEARS EX-MEMBER KARNATAKA MINORITY COMMISSION BRAHMANA MANCHALAYA SAGAR TALUK SHIMOGA DISTRICT KARNATAKA 577 401.

...CROSS OBJECTOR

(BY SMT. YUKTH ANIL, ADV., FOR SRI. T.N. VISHWANATHA, ADV.,)

AND:

KARNATAKA STATE MINORITIES COMMISSION BY ITS SECRETARY, 5TH FLOOR VISVESHWARAIAH TOWER BENGALURU - 560 001.

STATE OF KARNATAKA REP. BY ITS SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT MINORITY WELFARE DEPARTMENT VIKASA SOUDHA, DR. B.R. AMEBEDKAR VEEDHI BENGALURU - 560 001.

...RESPONDENTS

(BY SRI. ZAMEER PASHA, ADV., FOR R1 SMT. MAMATHA SHETTY, AGA FOR R2)

THIS WRIT APPEAL CROSS OBJECTION IS FILED UNDER ORDER LXI RULE 22 OF CPC R/W SECTION 4 OF THE KARNATAKA HIGH COURT ACT, PRAYING TO ALLOW THIS CROSS OBJECTION AND AWARD THE PAYMENT OF INTEREST AT THE RATE OF 12 PERCENT PER ANNUM ON THE TOTAL SALARY AMOUNT DUE TO BE PAID & ETC.

6 - NC: 2025:KHC:52318-DB W.A. No.1282/2023 AND CONNECTED WITH MATTERS

HC-KAR

THESE WRIT APPEALS, WRIT APPEAL CROSS OBJECTION AND C.C.C. COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER:

CORAM: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE ANU SIVARAMAN and HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIJAYKUMAR A. PATIL

ORAL JUDGMENT

(PER: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE ANU SIVARAMAN)

Heard the learned counsel appearing for the appellant, learned Additional Government Advocate and the learned counsel appearing for the respondent/writ petitioner.

The subject matter of the appeal is an order dated 07.09.2023 passed by the learned Single Judge in W.P.No.58289/2016 (GM-RES) directing the payment of salary to the respondent/writ petitioner at the rate of Rs.31,000/from 25.02.2009 to 31.07.2009 and thereafter at the rate of Rs.70,000/- per month from 01.08.2009 till September 2010. A cross objection is also on record claiming interest on the payment of the amounts directed to be paid to the respondent/writ petitioner.

7 - NC: 2025:KHC:52318-DB W.A. No.1282/2023 AND CONNECTED WITH MATTERS

HC-KAR

It is submitted by the learned counsel for the appellant - Karnataka State Minorities Commission (for short 'Commission' ) that there could have been no direction to pay the salary at the rate applicable to a Member of the Karnataka Public Service Commission to the respondent/writ petitioner since the nature of duties and responsibilities of a Member of Karnataka State Minorities Commission was very different from that of a Member of a Karnataka Public Service Commission. It is further submitted that Rules have specifically been framed with regard to allowances due to members of the appellant - Commission by Notification dated 24.09.2010. It is submitted that as regards the payment to be made to the Members, it is specifically provided in the said Rule as under:

"2. Substitution of rule 4:- In the Karnataka State Minorities Commission Rules, 2000, for rule 4 the following shall be substituted, namely:-

"4. Allowances and other emoluments payable to the Members of the Commission:- Allowances and other emoluments payable to the

8 - NC: 2025:KHC:52318-DB W.A. No.1282/2023 AND CONNECTED WITH MATTERS

HC-KAR

Members of the Commission shall be as follows, namely:-

(a) sitting fee of rupees one thousand per

every sitting but not exceeding rupees twenty thousand per month;

(b) allowances towards local conveyance,

telephone, stationery and other expenses of rupees five thousand per month;

(c) traveling allowance and dearness allowance at the rates admissible to Group-A (Senior Scale) Government Officers for the tours undertaken in performance of the functions enumerated in section 10 of Act;

Provided that the traveling allowance and dearness allowance shall be limited to the tours not exceeding ten days per month."

Learned counsel for the appellant submits that

since there was a Rule notified, the payment could have been only in terms of the said Rule and the payment directed by the learned Single Judge is not proper. It is further contended that in the light of the Rules, the direction to pay the amounts payable to a Member of Karnataka Public Service Commission is Per incuriam . It is

9 - NC: 2025:KHC:52318-DB W.A. No.1282/2023 AND CONNECTED WITH MATTERS

HC-KAR

further submitted that it was on the basis of Annexure-F - Notification dated 03.06.1999 that the learned Single Judge had directed the payment of amounts payable to the Members of the Karnataka Public Service Commission to the respondent/writ petitioner as well. It is submitted that the said notification was only in respect of the Members of Karnataka State Commission for Backward Classes and that the Members of the Appellant Commission are not entitled to the said payment in the absence of any Rule or Notification making the same applicable to the Members of the appellant - Commission.

Learned counsel for the respondent/writ petitioner, however, points out that the respondent/writ petitioner was in service from 25.02.2009 to 09.03.2010 and that he is entitled to salary and allowances for the said period. It is submitted that during the said period when the respondent/writ petitioner was working as Member of the appellant - Commission, there was no Rule notified in respect of the salary and allowances payable to

10 - NC: 2025:KHC:52318-DB W.A. No.1282/2023 AND CONNECTED WITH MATTERS

HC-KAR

Members of appellant - Commission. It is submitted that it is in the above circumstances that the amounts payable to the Members of the Karnataka State Commission for Backward Classes had been made applicable by this Court to the Members of the appellant - Commission as well.

Learned counsel for the respondent/writ petitioner further submits that a cross objection has also been filed by the respondent as W.A.Crob.No.5/2025 claiming interest for the delayed payment in view of the fact that the payment had been wrongfully denied to the respondent/writ petitioner. Learned counsel would also placed reliance on the decision of the Apex Court in the case of The State of Andhra Pradesh and Another vs.

Smt.Dinavahi Lakshmi Kameswari¹ .

We have considered the contentions advanced

on either side.

1 Civil Appeal No.399/2021 decided on 08.02.2021

11 - NC: 2025:KHC:52318-DB W.A. No.1282/2023 AND CONNECTED WITH MATTERS

HC-KAR

We notice that the respondent/writ petitioner

was admittedly working as a Member of the appellant - Commission from 25.02.2009 to 09.03.2010. Though the removal was challenged, the writ petition as well as the writ appeal and the SLP were dismissed. Therefore, the claim of the respondent/writ petitioner for salary and emoluments would only be for the period from 25.02.2009 to 09.03.2010. The learned Single Judge considered the contentions advanced and found that Rule 3 of the Karnataka State Commission for Backward Classes, Rules, 1999, provided that Salary and allowance payable to and the terms and conditions of service of the Chairman and Members of the Commission shall be such as may be prescribed. It is not in dispute that there was no prescription of the salary and emoluments payable to Members of the Commission as on the relevant time i.e., on 09.03.2010.

The learned Single Judge found that in an earlier writ petition i.e., W.P.No.1116/2007, a learned

12 - NC: 2025:KHC:52318-DB W.A. No.1282/2023 AND CONNECTED WITH MATTERS

HC-KAR

Single Judge of this Court had directed the State to fix the salary payable to the petitioner therein as a Member of the Karnataka State Minorities Commission from 28.11.2001 to 23.01.2004 in a manner and analogous to the fixation of the salary done with respect of the Members of Karnataka State Commission for Backward Classes.

The Karnataka State Commission for Backward Classes as per Annexure-F notification was paying salary payable to the Members of the Karnataka Public Service Commission to its Members as well. It is based on the said judgment that the learned Single Judge had directed that in view of the notification dated 03.06.1999, the same amounts that are being paid to the Members of Karnataka State Commission for Backward Classes is liable to be paid to the respondent/writ petitioner as well.

Though the learned counsel for the appellant submits that Annexure-E - Notification has been issued and ought to have been looked into, we notice that

13 - NC: 2025:KHC:52318-DB W.A. No.1282/2023 AND CONNECTED WITH MATTERS

HC-KAR

Annexure-E had been issued only on 24.09.2010 and is apparently prospective in nature. In the above circumstances, we are of the opinion that the contention that the direction issued is Per incuriam and without considering Annexure-E cannot be accepted. We find no grounds to interfere with the judgment of the learned Single Judge except in observing that since the respondent/writ petitioner admittedly demitted office on 09.03.2010, the amount payable would only be till such date. The writ appeals are, therefore, dismissed .

Insofar as W.A.Crob.No.5/2025 is concerned,

having considered the contentions advanced and having perused the judgments made available, we are of the opinion that this is not a fit case for grant of interest for the delayed payment. However, in view of the fact that the respondent/writ petitioner had to await the payment of amounts for considerable length of period, to compensate the respondent/writ petitioner, an amount of Rs.15,000/is ordered as costs to be payable to the respondent/writ

14 - NC: 2025:KHC:52318-DB W.A. No.1282/2023 AND CONNECTED WITH MATTERS

HC-KAR

petitioner. With the above observations, the cross objection is disposed of .

Insofar as CCC No.81/2024 is concerned, the impugned order dated 07.09.2023 passed by the learned Single Judge in W.P.No.58289/2016 is to be complied within two months and with the said direction, the contempt proceedings are dropped with the liberty to file fresh contempt petition, if the order is not complied within two months from today.

Sd/(ANU SIVARAMAN) JUDGE

Sd/(VIJAYKUMAR A. PATIL) JUDGE

BSR

List No.: 1 Sl No.: 22