Sri. G. K. Suresh Vs the State of Karnataka

SRI. G. K. SURESH S/O LATE G.K. KRISHNA IYER, AGED ABOUT 61 YEARS, R/AT 311, SRI. VENUGOPAL SWAMY TEMPLE ROAD FORT, DEVANAHALLI TALUK, BENGALURU RURAL DISTRICT 562 110

¶12

…COMPLAINANT

¶13

(BY SRI. G.K. SURESH, PARTY-IN-PERSON)

¶14

Digitally signed by NIRMALA DEVI Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

¶15

AND:

¶16

THE STATE OF KARNATAKA DEPARTMENT FOR THE EMPOWERMENT OF THE DIFFERENTLY ABLED AND SENIOR CITIZENS, ADDRESS: DR. AMBEDKAR VEEDHI, VIDHANA SOUDHA, BENGALURU - 560 001 REPRESENTED BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY

¶17

SRI. BASAVARAJU A.B THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER

¶18

2 -

¶19

NC: 2026:KHC:16150-DB CCC No. 955 of 2025

¶20

HC-KAR

¶21

ADDRESS: DISTRICT OFFICE COMPLEX, BEERASANDRA VILLAGE, CHAPPARADAKALU, DEVANAHALLI TALUK, BENGALURU RURAL DISTRICT 562 110

¶22

SRI. SATHISH THE DISTRICT DISABLED WELFARE OFFICER [DDWO] ADDRESS NO.3, DISTRICT OFFICE COMPLEX, BEERASANDRA VILLAGE, CHAPPARADAKALU, DEVANAHALLI TALUK, BENGALURU RURAL DISTRICT - 562 110

¶23

…ACCUSED

¶24

(BY SRI. S.H. RAGHAVENDRA, AGA)

¶25

THIS CCC IS FILED UNDER SECTIONS 11 AND 12 OF THE CONTEMPT OF COURTS ACT, 1971 R/W ARTICLE 215 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, BY THE COMPLAINANT, PRAYING TO INITIATE CONTEMPT OF COURT PROCEEDINGS AGAINST THE ACCUSED NO.2 AND 3 AND TO TAKE SUITABLE ACTION AGAINST THE ACCUSED NO.2 AND 3 FOR WILLFUL DISOBEDIENCE TO COMPLY WITH THE ORDER DATED 14.03.2025 PASSED BY THE LEARNED SINGLE JUDGE IN WP NO.6417/2025 VIDE ANNEXURE-A.

¶26

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

¶27

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. VIBHU BAKHRU, CHIEF JUSTICE and HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE C.M. POONACHA

¶28

3 -

¶29

NC: 2026:KHC:16150-DB CCC No. 955 of 2025

¶30

HC-KAR

¶31

ORAL ORDER

¶32

(PER: HON'BLE MR. VIBHU BAKHRU, CHIEF JUSTICE)

¶33

The complainant has filed the present complaint alleging willful disobedience of the order dated 14.03.2025 passed by the learned Single Judge of this Court in Writ Petition No.6417/2025 (GM-RES). The complainant had filed the said petition inter alia praying that directions be issued to the Deputy Commissioner (arrayed as respondent No.2 in the writ petition) to consider and grant permission to establish a Xerox and computer shop in and around the premises of Devanahalli Taluk Office as requested in his representation dated 26.12.2024. The said petition was disposed of with a direction to the respondent - State to consider the complainant's representation and pass necessary orders.

¶34

The accused have filed a compliance affidavit affirming that the grievance of the complainant was duly considered and it was concluded that there is no scope to establish Xerox and computer shops in and around the Taluk Office, Devanahalli, as those would come within the margin line of the main road.

¶35

4 -

¶36

NC: 2026:KHC:16150-DB CCC No. 955 of 2025

¶37

HC-KAR

¶38

In view of the above, the proceedings under the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971, are not maintainable as the complainant's representation has been considered.

¶39

Having stated above, we also note that since the complainant is a person with disabilities, he may be entitled to the benefits of certain schemes framed by the Government. The complainant is at liberty to approach the Karnataka State Legal Services Authority to ascertain his rights and avail other substantive remedies, if any. Needless to state that if the complainant approaches the Karnataka State Legal Services Authority, he would be afforded the necessary assistance.

¶40

The complaint is closed with the aforesaid observations.

¶41

All pending applications are also disposed of.

¶42

Sd/(VIBHU BAKHRU) CHIEF JUSTICE

¶43

Sd/(C.M. POONACHA) JUDGE

¶44

Vmb, List No.: 1 Sl No.: 13

Sri. G. K. Suresh v. the State of Karnataka

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sri. G. K. Suresh v. the State of Karnataka

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Rajiv Gandhi University of Health Science Vs Rushabh R

Sri Mukesh Mittal Vs Manivannan the Commissioner

Sri.Sataba Moloji Suryavanshi Vs the State of Karnataka

Dr H M Krishnamurthy Vs State of Karnataka

National Highways Authority of India Vs Mr. U Krishna Karanth

V. Rajappa Vs Smt.Durgashree