- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC:11145-DB CCC No. 402 of 2024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 10TH DAY OF MARCH, 2025 PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR. N. V. ANJARIA, CHIEF JUSTICE AND THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.I.ARUN CCC NO. 402 OF 2024 (CIVIL) BETWEEN: 1. SHRI HANUMANTHARAYA B S/O BHEEMARAYA AGED ABOUT 46 YEARS WORKING AS INSPECTOR OF POLICE (CIVIL) DIRECTORATE OF CIVIL RIGHTS ENFORCEMENT BENGALURU REGION, PALACE ROAD BENGALURU - 560011. …COMPLAINANT (BY SRI P.S. RAJAGOPAL, SENIOR ADVOCATE A/W SRI P.N. NANJA REDDY, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA REPRESENTED BY ITS CHIEF SECRETARY VIDHANA SOUDHA BENGALURU - 560001. ....PRO FORMA RESPONDENT 2. SRI S R UMASHANKAR IAS, SECRETARY DEPARTMENT OF HOME AFFAIRS VIDHANA SOUDHA BENGALURU-560001. Digitally signed by PRABHAKAR SWETHA KRISHNAN Location: High Court of Karnataka - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC:11145-DB CCC No. 402 of 2024 3. SRI BANADARANGAIAH THE ADDL GOVERNMENT SECRETARY (INCHARGE) INTERNAL ADMINISTRATION DEPARTMENT) (POLICE SERVICES-A) DEPARTMENT OF HOME AFFAIRS VIDHANA SOUDHA BENGALURU-560001. 4. SRI ALOK MOHAN I P S THE DIRECTOR GENERAL AND INSPECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE KARNATAKA STATE NO.2 NRUPATHUNGA ROAD BENGALURU-560002. …ACCUSED (BY SRI NAVEEN CHANDRASHEKAR, AGA) THIS CCC IS FILED UNDER SECTIONS 11 AND 12 OF THE CONTEMPT OF COURTS ACT, BY THE COMPLAINANT PRAYS THAT THE HON'BLE COURT BE PLEASED TO PUNISH THE ACCUSED FOR HAVING DISOBEYED THE ORDERS OF THIS HON'BLE COURT IN W.P.NO.14777/2022 DATED 23.01.2023 AND R.P.NO.116/2023 DATED 05.01.2024 (ANNEXURES A AND C) AFTER ISSUING NOTICE TO THE ACCUSED AND TAKE APPROPRIATE ACTION AGAINST THE ACCUSED IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER: - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC:11145-DB CCC No. 402 of 2024 CORAM: HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR. JUSTICE N. V. ANJARIA and HON'BLE MR JUSTICE M.I.ARUN ORAL JUDGMENT (PER: HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR. JUSTICE N. V. ANJARIA) Heard learned Senior Advocate Mr. P.S. Rajagopal along with learned advocate Mr. P.N. Nanja Reddy for the complainant and learned Additional Government Advocate Mr. Naveen Chandrashekar for the respondents. 2. While disposing of the writ petition, the Division Bench of this Court, by the order dated 23.01.2023, inter alia observed and directed as under, "5. On perusal of Annexure – A17, it is seen that though posting is on independent charge on pay scale specified therein, it is not seriously disputed that the officers are juniors to the petitioner. It also transpires that no charge memo is pending as on date. It is also not in dispute that sufficient vacancies are available. On assessing the facts, we are of the opinion that the case of petitioner could have been considered by the respondent, instead of adopting such a approach. It is needless - 4 - NC: 2025:KHC:11145-DB CCC No. 402 of 2024 to state that no right of promotion is vested in an employee so long as his seniority is not violated. 6. In that view of the matter, we are of the opinion that the writ petition be disposed of by setting aside the order of the Tribunal and further directing the respondents to treat the present application as a representation for consideration of petitioner’s application on par with his juniors as noted as per Annexure - A17. Accordingly, writ petition is allowed in part. The order of the Tribunal is set aside. The respondents are directed to treat the application as representation and consider the case of the petitioner in accordance with law and pass necessary orders strictly in accordance with law within three months from the date of receipt of copy of this order. Ordered accordingly. There shall be no order as to costs. After having dictated the order, the learned AGA points out that indeed the articles of charges have been issued on 07.09.2020, in that view of the matter, the above order is recalled. The counsel for the Petitioner has all along been contending that no charge memo has been issued. The petitioner was duty bound to be fair to the Court, but we find the Petitioner has attempted to suppress information and mislead the Court. The order of the Tribunal calls for no interference. Writ petitions stand rejected." 3. In this petition, the non-compliance of the above directions are complained of. - 5 - NC: 2025:KHC:11145-DB CCC No. 402 of 2024 4. In response to the contempt petition, compliance affidavit came to be filed by respondent No.2 along with the copy of the endorsement/order dated 25.06.2024 passed by the competent authority of the Home Department (Police Services-A). In the said order, Rule 2 of the Karnataka Civil Services (Regulation of Pay, Pension and Promotion) Rules, 1978 was referred to note that the provision for retrospective promotion is only for certain instances in the Rule. The complainant was communicated that his request dated 22.01.2024 was examined as per the provisions of the said Rule and that it was not possible, in view of absence of provision, to give retrospective promotion to the complainant. 4.1 It was further stated in the said endorsement/order that no officer junior to him was considered for promotion and no junior in the seniority list of the police inspector cadre has been promoted to the cadre of DySP (Civil). It was also recorded that departmental inquiry was pending against the complainant and in the meeting of the Departmental Promotion Committee dated 08.01.2020, the complainant's case for promotion was not considered and that, after the inquiries are completed, it will be considered as per the Rules. - 6 - NC: 2025:KHC:11145-DB CCC No. 402 of 2024 5. In view of the above endorsement/order which marks compliance of the directions of learned Single Judge, the present contempt petition does not survive. 6. Learned advocate for the complainant, however, submitted that the complainant has grievance about the grounds mentioned in the endorsement/order for denial of promotion. 6.1 In this regard, it is observed, without expressing or going into the merits, that it will be open for the complainant to have a recourse of independent remedy to challenge the endorsement/order on its merits and in accordance with law. 7. With the above observations, the contempt petition is disposed of. Sd/- (N. V. ANJARIA) CHIEF JUSTICE Sd/- (M.I.ARUN) JUDGE KPS List No.: 1 Sl No.: 32