- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC:14352-DB CCC No. 380 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 4TH DAY OF APRIL, 2025 PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR. N. V. ANJARIA, CHIEF JUSTICE AND THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K. V. ARAVIND CIVIL CONTEMPT PETITION No. 380 OF 2025 BETWEEN: 1. SRI R. B. NAGESH, S/O LATE R.M. BASAPPA, AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS, RESIDENT OF RAMENAHLLI VILLAGE, KASABA HOBLI, SAKALESAPURA TALUK, HASSAN DISTRICT - 573 134. 2. SMT. ASHA G.T. , W/O SURESH K., AGED ABOUT 44 YEARS, RESIDENT OF BETTAHALLI VILLAGE , PALYA HOBLI, ALURU TALUK, HASSAN DISTRICT - 573 218. …COMPLAINANTS (BY SRI. M. J. ALVA, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. DR. MANJUNATH V., THE SPL. LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER, HEMAVATHI RESERVOIR PROJECT, D.C. OFFICE BUILDING, HASANA DISTRICT, HASANA - 573 201. Digitally signed by VALLI MARIMUTHU Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC:14352-DB CCC No. 380 of 2025 2. SMT. SATHYABHAMA C., THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER, HASANA DISTRICT, HASANA - 573 201. 3. DR. M. K. SHRUTHI, THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER, SAKALESHPURA SUB-DIVISION, SAKALESHPURA, HASANA DISTRICT - 573 134. 4. MR.MALLIKARJUNA, THE TAHSILDAR, ALUR TALUK, ALUR, HASANA DISTRICT - 573 213. …ACCUSED 5. STATE OF KARNATAKA, REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE, M.S. BUILDING, BENGALURU - 560001. ...PROFORMA RESPONDENT (BY SMT. PRAMODHINI KISHAN, AGA) THIS CCC IS FILED UNDER SECTIONS 11 AND 12 OF THE CONTEMPT OF COURT ACT, 1971, BY THE COMPLAINANT, PRAYING TO TAKE COGNIZANCE OF THE ABOVE COMPLAINT AGAINST THE ACCUSED PERSONS FOR THE DISOBEDIENCE AND NON-COMPLIANCE OF THE ORDERS DATED 28.03.2024 PASSED BY THE LEARNED SINGLE JUDGE OF THIS HON'BLE COURT IN WP No.23656/2023(KLR-LG) PRODUCED AT ANNEXURE-.A AND PUNISH THE ACCUSED. THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC:14352-DB CCC No. 380 of 2025 CORAM: HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR. JUSTICE N. V. ANJARIA and HON'BLE MR JUSTICE K. V. ARAVIND ORAL JUDGMENT (PER: HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR. JUSTICE N. V. ANJARIA) Heard, learned advocate Mr. M.J. Alva, for the complainant. 2. By the order dated 28.03.2024, learned Single Judge, while allowing the writ petition in part, issued the following directions, "(ii) The impugned order dated 10.06.2023 in case No. L.N.D./HE.JA.YO.(1)(D):48/2009-10 passed by the Special Land Acquisition Officer, Hemavathi Reservoir Project, Hassan, at Annexure ‘A’, is hereby quashed and set aside. (iii) The matter stands remanded back to the SLAO to have the value of the standing trees in the granted land assessed at the hands of the competent authority. Thereafter information shall be provided to the petitioners in terms of Rule 11 of the Rules, 1969, if the value is to be paid by the petitioner. (iv) On the other hand, if the valuation of the standing trees is more than Rs.5,000/, as provided in sub-rule (3) of Rule 11 of the Rules, 1969, then the SLAO shall have the trees removed in terms of the provisions contained in sub-rule (3) of Rule 11 of the Rules, 1969. (v) At any rate, the SLAO shall keep the petitioners informed of his decision having regard to the provisions contained in sub-rule (2) and sub-rule (3) of Rule 11 of the Rules, 1969. - 4 - NC: 2025:KHC:14352-DB CCC No. 380 of 2025 (vi) Consequent to the restoration of the grant in favour of the petitioners, the revenue entries shall also be restored in the RTC." 3. The aforesaid directions are brought under the contempt jurisdiction for their non-compliance. 4. From a bare reading of the said directions, it could be immediately seen that while certain directions are issued to the Special Land Acquisition Officer, there is no prescription of time limit for their compliance. Therefore, it is not possible to conclude at this stage that any contempt is committed by any of the respondents, much less willful contempt. 5. It is to be noted that after the aforesaid order, the complainants made a representation dated 07.06.2024 to the respondents seeking compliance of the order in which also, no time limit was instructed to be observed. 6. In that view, the contempt petition is not entertained. However, since the directions of the court should not go uncomplied with, it is provided that the respondents shall comply with the directions within twelve weeks from today. - 5 - NC: 2025:KHC:14352-DB CCC No. 380 of 2025 7. The petition is disposed of with the aforesaid direction. Sd/- (N. V. ANJARIA) CHIEF JUSTICE Sd/- (K. V. ARAVIND) JUDGE VBS List No.: 1 Sl No.: 9