- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC:5316-DB CCC No. 945 of 2024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 5TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2025 PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR. N. V. ANJARIA, CHIEF JUSTICE AND THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.I.ARUN CCC NO. 945 OF 2024 (CIVIL) BETWEEN: 1. SRI G.S.RAVISHANKAR AGED ABOUT 62 YEARS, S/O. LATE G.S. SHIVANANJAPPA, 'SHIVA SUNDARA KANASU', 80 FEET ROAD, A M PALYA, SIRA GATE, TUMAKURU - 572 106. …COMPLAINANT (BY SRI B.C. SEETHARAMA RAO, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. SRI MAHESH MANAGING DIRECTOR, THE CAUVERY NEERAVARI NIGAMA LIMITED, A GOVERNMENT OF KARNATAKA ENTERPRISE SURFACE WATER DATA CENTER, 3RD AND 4TH FLOORS, ANANDA RAO CIRCLE, BENGALURU - 560 009. Digitally signed by PRABHAKAR SWETHA KRISHNAN Location: High Court of Karnataka - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC:5316-DB CCC No. 945 of 2024 2. SRI PANIRAJ THE CHIEF ENGINEER HEMAVATHI CANAL ZONE, CAUVERY NEERAVARI NIGAMA LIMITED, TUMAKUR - 572 012. 3. SRI GIRISH BABU S., THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, HEMAVATHI CANAL DIVISION , CAUVERY NEERAVARI NIGAMA LIMITED, KUNIGAL ROAD, TUMAKUR - 572 012. …ACCUSED (BY SRI B.R. PRASHANTH, ADVOCATE) 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, PRYAING TO INITIATE ACTION FOR CONTEMPT OF COURT AGAINST THE ACCUSED FOR HAVING DELIBERATELY AND WILL-FULLY DISOBEYED THE ORDERS/DIRECTIONS OF THIS HON'BLE COURT DATED 13.06.2024 PASSED IN WRIT PETITION NO.24959/2022 AND PUNISH THE ACCUSED AND ETC., THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR ORDERS THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER: - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC:5316-DB CCC No. 945 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 advocate Mr. B.C. Seetharama Rao for the complainant and learned advocate Mr. B.R. Prashanth for the respondents. 2. In this petition filed seeking to invoke the jurisdiction of this Court under the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 it is in respect of the following directions of learned Single Judge passed in order dated 13.06.2024 while disposing of the writ petition, the breach and the consequential contempt is complained of, "5. In view of the aforesaid facts and circumstances and rival submissions, the respondents are hereby directed to address the grievances of the petitioner and consider his representation dated 07.09.2022 at Annexure-R and pass appropriate orders bearing in mind the material on record produced by the petitioner and in accordance with law, within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order." - 4 - NC: 2025:KHC:5316-DB CCC No. 945 of 2024 3. The disputes between the parties as sought to be agitated in the writ petition arose from the contract executed between them. What was prayed by the petitioner was to direct the respondents to consider the representation dated 07.09.2022. It was next prayed to direct respondent No.1 to accept and approve the calculations provided by the petitioner and the third prayer was to direct the respondents to fix the rate for the additional and substituted work carried out by the petitioner and consequentially to make payment in that regard. 3.1 The petition came to be disposed of with the directions as aforequoted. What the learned Single Judge directed was to require the respondents to address the grievances of the petitioner and consider his representation dated 07.09.2025. 4. In response to issuance of notice, the respondents have appeared to file their statement of objections-cum-memo of compliance where it is inter alia stated that the respondents have considered the representation dated 07.09.2022 and an order/endorsement has been passed on 06.11.2024. The copy of the said endorsement dated 06.11.2024 figures on record. - 5 - NC: 2025:KHC:5316-DB CCC No. 945 of 2024 4.1 The further objections were filed by the complainant to the said endorsement countering what is stated in the endorsement. As per the said endorsement dated 06.11.2024 the complainant is intimated that he may execute a supplementary agreement for the extra work approved which has the financial implication. 5. The complainant is thus requested to execute the supplementary agreement. It is to be recollected that the direction of the learned Single Judge was to consider "the representation of the petitioner". By taking aforesaid stand, the representation is considered, which could be said to be marking compliance of the directions of the learned Single Judge. 6. The contempt petition is not liable to be furthered anymore. It will not survive. 7. Accordingly, the petition stands disposed of. However, if the petitioner has any grievance about the merit contents of the said endorsement dated 06.11.2024 and the stand/action taken by the respondent-authority, it is open for the complainant to execute appropriate independent proceedings in - 6 - NC: 2025:KHC:5316-DB CCC No. 945 of 2024 accordance of law 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.: 117