- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-K:3743-DB CCC No. 200143 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA KALABURAGI BENCH DATED THIS THE 9TH DAY OF JULY, 2025 PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MOHAMMAD NAWAZ AND THE HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE K S HEMALEKHA CIVIL CONTEMPT PETITION NO.200143 OF 2025 BETWEEN: ASHOK S/O LATE KESHAVRAO POLICE PATIL, AGED ABOUT: 77 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE, R/O: LADMUGALI TQ: ALAND (NOW KAMALAPUR), DIST: KALABURAGI – 585102. …COMPLAINANT (BY SRI SATISHKUMAR D.GADKAR, ADVOCATE FOR COMPLAINANT) AND: 1. MS. FOUZIA TARANNUM IAS, THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER, KALABURAGI DISTRICT, KALABURAGI – 585101. 2. MS. SAHITYA M ALADAKATTI IAS, THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER, KALABURAGI SUB-DIVISION, DIST: KALABURAGI – 585102. 3. MR. ASHOK HIROLI, THE TAHASILDAR, Digitally signed by BASALINGAPPA SHIVARAJ DHUTTARGAON Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-K:3743-DB CCC No. 200143 of 2025 KALABURAGI TALUKA, DIST: KALABURAGI – 585102. 4. SHRI JEELANI H. MOKASHI CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER THE KARNATAKA STATE BOARD OF WAKF, CUNNINGHAM ROAD, BANGALORE- 560052. …ACCUSED 5. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, REVENUE DEPARTMENT, VIDHANA SOUDHA, BENGALURU- 560052. …PROFOMA PARTY (BY SRI SHIVAKUMAR TENGLI, AGA FOR R/A5; R/A1 TO R/A3 ARE SERVED) THIS CIVIL CONTEMPT PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTIONS 11 AND 12 OF THE CONTEMPT OF COURTS ACT READ WITH ARTICLE 215 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO INITIATE CONTEMPT PETITION AGAINST ACCUSED AND PUNISH FOR CONTEMPT COMMITTED BY THEM INSPITE OF SPECIFIC DIRECTIONS OF THIS HON’BLE COURT IN W.P.NO.203545/2024 DATED 10-12-2024 AND PASS APPROPRIATE ORDER BY UPHOLDING THE LAWFUL ORDER OF THIS HON’BLE COURT, IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE. THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MOHAMMAD NAWAZ AND HON'BLE MRS JUSTICE K S HEMALEKHA - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-K:3743-DB CCC No. 200143 of 2025 ORAL ORDER (PER: HON'BLE MRS JUSTICE K S HEMALEKHA) The present contempt petition is initiated against accused/respondent Nos.1 to 3 for willful disobedience of the order dated 10.12.2024 in W.P.No.203545/2024. 2. By the impugned order, the learned Single Judge directed the respondent Nos.1 to 3 in the writ petition to delete the name of respondent No.4 – The Karnataka State Board of Wakf found in Column No.11 of the RTC in relation to the subject land within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of copy of the order. 3. Compliance affidavit is filed by Mohd. Mosin Ahmed, who is presently working as Tahasildar, Office of Tahasildar, Kamalapur taluk, District Kalaburagi stating that the directions issued in the writ petition are complied with and the name of the Wakf Board from Column No.11 in the Record of Rights pertaining to Sy.No.96/* (subject - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-K:3743-DB CCC No. 200143 of 2025 land) has been deleted. Along with affidavit, RTC (Annexure-R1) is annexed, reflecting the correction. 4. The relevant portion of the affidavit at para No.4 is culled out as under: “04. I most respectfully state that, the directions of the Hon'ble Court issued in the writ petition was complied by deleting the name of the Wakf Board from column no.11 in the ROR pertaining to the Sy.No.96/* after attending all the formalities. The copy of the said ROR is herewith marked is at ANNEXURE R.1. I further state that, the office of Tahasildar, Kamalapur Taluka and District Kalaburagi received various similar orders for deleting the Wakf entered in the column no. 11 of the ROR's there was a server problem for his deleting the name of the Wakf in the ROR due to the heavy load on the server since in almost all talukas of entire Kalaburagi Region were doing the same work of deleting the entries of Wakf made in the column no.11. And for each every stage steps the thumb has to be given in the computer Bhoomi application. Therefore, there is a delay of 122 days caused in passing the orders for implementing the ROR. The said delay was caused was due to the rush of work and also due to the heavy load on the Bhoomi application and also for attending other office duties and the said delay was not caused intentional.” (Emphasis supplied) - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-K:3743-DB CCC No. 200143 of 2025 5. The learned counsel for the complainant does not dispute the compliance. 6. In light of the compliance affidavit placed on record, the contempt proceedings initiated by the complainant are hereby dropped. Sd/- (MOHAMMAD NAWAZ) JUDGE Sd/- (K S HEMALEKHA) JUDGE BL List No.: 1 Sl No.: 7 CT:NI