- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC:10068-DB CCC No. 711 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. 711 OF 2024 (CIVIL) BETWEEN: 1. C.H. NAGESH S/O. LATE HUCCHE GOWDA, AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS, RESIDING AT NO.1369/1 P.W.D. COLONY, HASSAN - 573 201. …COMPLAINANT (BY MS. MONIKA N., ADVOCATE FOR SRI SAMPATH A.,ADVOCATE) AND: 1. SRI YOGANANDA C COMMISSIONER, HASSAN CITY MUNICIPALITY, HASSAN - 577 201. …ACCUSED (BY SRI A. RAVISHANKAR, ADVOCATE) THIS CCC IS FILED UNDER SECTION 11 AND 12 OF THE CONTEMPT OF COURTS ACT, 1971, PRAYING TO PUNISH THE ACCUSED PERSON FOR WILLFUL DISOBEDIENCE AND NON- COMPLIANCE OF THE ORDER DATED 15.12.2023 PASSED IN CIVIL CONTEMPT PETITION NO.352/2023 AT ANNEXURE-A. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER: Digitally signed by CHAITHRA Location: High Court of Karnataka - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC:10068-DB CCC No. 711 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) The only direction in the order dated 06.12.2021 of learned Single Judge while disposing of the writ petition was to the respondents to consider the representation of the petitioner dated 05.08.2020 and pass appropriate orders. 2. Learned advocate Ms. N. Monika for learned advocate Mr. A. Sampath for the complainant submitted that present is the aggravated contempt, since earlier CCC No.352 of 2023 was filed. However, there was no escape from the factual position that no further direction was given by the court except to consider the representation. It is the breach of this direction which was complained of in the contempt proceedings. 3. In response to the notice issued by the court, the respondent appeared and filed the compliance affidavit along with which, the order dated 06.11.2024 is produced on record (copy at page - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC:10068-DB CCC No. 711 of 2024 Nos.18 to 21). The said order amounts to consideration of the representation of the petitioner, and therefore compliance. 4. An attempt was made in vain by learned advocate for the complainant that certain provisions of the Karnataka Town and Country Planning Act as well as the Karnataka Municipalities Act are violated. The said aspect travels into the merits as rightly submitted by learned advocate Mr. A. Ravishankar for the respondent. 5. In the aforesaid view, the present contempt petition does not survive. It is accordingly disposed of. If the complainant is aggrieved about the merits of the order dated 06.11.2024, it will be open for him to institute appropriate independent proceedings to challenge the same in respect of which, however, this court does not express any opinion on merits. Sd/- (N. V. ANJARIA) CHIEF JUSTICE Sd/- (M.I.ARUN) JUDGE CR/List No.: 1 Sl No.: 100