Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Karnataka · body

2025 DAILYLAW 52794 (KAR)

SHRI ERAPPA S/O SEDEPPA ARAVALLI v. DR S SELVA KUMAR

CCC/100296/2025 · 2025-10-14

Geetha K B, S G Pandit

Contempt Petitionbody2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:13793-DB CCC No. 100296 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA,AT DHARWAD DATED THIS THE 14TH DAY OF OCTOBER, 2025 PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S G PANDIT AND THE HON'BLE MRS JUSTICE GEETHA K.B. CIVIL CONTEMPT PETITION NO. 100296 OF 2025 BETWEEN: SHRI ERAPPA S/O. SEDEPPA ARAVALLI AGE: 23 YEARS, OCC. AGRICULTURE, R/O. KADROLLI VILLAGE, TQ. KITTUR, DIST. BELAGAVI …COMPLAINANT (BY SRI. SABEEL AHMED DARVESHU, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. DR. S. SELVA KUMAR SECRETARY, TO THE DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE, M.S. BUILDING, BENGALURU-560001. 2. SHRI GURUDATT HEGDE THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER, DHARWAD DISTRICT, DHARWAD-590001. 3. SHRI. S.F. PATIL, THE CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER, ZILLAPANCHAYATH BELAGAVI, 4360/A, KACHERI GALLI, KHADE BAZAR, RAVIWAR PETH, BELAGAVI-590001. Digitally signed by BHARATHI H M Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA DHARWAD BENCH Date: 2025.10.25 16:06:35 +0530 - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:13793-DB CCC No. 100296 of 2025 4. SHRI. T.S. MURALIDHAR, THE EXECUTIVE OFFICER, TALUK PANCHAYATH, HQWG+MH3, KITTUR, KARNATAKA 591115. 5. VINAY KUMAR KORAVI PANCHAYATH DEVELOPMENT OFFICER (PDO), KADROLLI GRAM PANCHAYATH, TQ. KITTUR, DIST. BELAGAVI-591153. …ACCUSED 6. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA REPRESENTED BY AGA, HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH, DHARWAD. …PROFORMA RESPONDENT (BY SRI. SHARAD V. MAGADUM, AGA FOR PROFORMA RESPONDENT; SRI. V. SHIVARAJ HIREMATH, ADVOCATE FOR A3 TO A5) THIS CCC IS FILED UNDER SECTIONS 11 AND 12 OF THE CONTEMPT OF COURTS ACT, 1971, R/W. ARTICLE 215 OF CONSTITUTION OF INDIA,1950, PRAYING TO, PUNISH THE ACCUSED NO.5 HEREIN FOR DISOBEYING THE ORDER DATED 24.01.2025 PASSED BY THE LEARNED SINGLE JUDGE OF THIS COURT IN WP NO.107445/2024 (LB-RES), AS PER ANNEXURE-B. ISSUE APPROPRIATE DIRECTIONS TO ACCUSED NO.5 TO COMPLY WITH THE DIRECTIONS ISSUED VIDE ORDER DATED 24.01.2025 PASSED BY THE LEARNED SINGLE JUDGE OF THIS COURT IN WP NO.107445/2024 (LB-RES), AS PER ANNEXURE-B TO ISSUE E-SWATHU IN FAVOUR OF THE COMPLAINANT AND ETC.,. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S G PANDIT AND THE HON'BLE MRS JUSTICE GEETHA K.B. - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:13793-DB CCC No. 100296 of 2025 ORAL ORDER (PER: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.G.PANDIT) This contempt petition is filed under Sections 11 and 12 of Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 r/w Article 215 of Constitution of India, alleging the disobedience of order dated 24.01.2025 passed in WP No.107445/2024 wherein this Court passed the following order:- “(i) Petition is partly allowed. (ii) As and when the petitioner to make an application for grant computerised record of rights Respondent No.5 is directed to consider the application within 30 days from the date of receipt of the application. (iii) As and when the petitioner to make an application for grant of plan sanction and building licence in the applicable format accompanied by necessary documents, the same would be considered in accordance with the applicable laws by respondent No.5 within a period of 60 days of such submission. 2. Upon issuance of notice to the respondent-accused, today, learned counsel Sri Shivaraj Hiremath appearing on behalf of accused Nos.3, 4 and 5 files an affidavit of accused No.5 dated 14.10.2025 enclosing two documents, - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:13793-DB CCC No. 100296 of 2025 i.e. letter dated 08.10.2025 addressed to the C.E.O. Taluka Panchayat, Kittur and the letter of the P.D.O. to the complainant. In the communication, P.D.O. has stated that the complainant would be entitled for computerised record of rights in respect of Site No.236 and if the complainant makes application for issuance of sanction plan in respect of Site No.236, the same would be considered in accordance with law. It is also made clear that the complainant would not be entitled for Site No.568/A/5/1. 3. If the complainant is aggrieved by the endorsement, it is open for the complainant to challenge those communications in accordance with law before appropriate forum. 4. Since the communication is issued to the complainant on consideration of the petitioners' representations, we are of the view that there is substantial - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:13793-DB CCC No. 100296 of 2025 compliance with the order passed by this Court. Hence, further proceedings are dropped. Sd/- (S G PANDIT) JUDGE Sd/- (GEETHA K.B.) JUDGE VMB, CT-CMU, LIST NO.: 1 SL NO.: 12