Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Karnataka · body

2025 DAILYLAW 57659 (KAR)

HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA v. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA

WP/11822/2024 · 2025-02-14

K V Aravind, N V Anjaria Cj

Public Interest Litigationbody2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC:18154-DB WP No. 11822 of 2024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 14TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2025 PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR N. V. ANJARIA, CHIEF JUSTICE AND THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE K. V. ARAVIND WRIT PETITION NO. 11822 OF 2024 (GM-RES-PIL) BETWEEN: 1 . HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA DR. AMBEDKAR VEEDHI BENGALURU - 560 001 REPRESENTED BY THE REGISTRAR GENERAL ... PETITIONER (BY SRI MADHUKAR M. DESHPANDE, ADVOCATE) AND: 1 . THE STATE OF KARNATAKA REP. BY THE CHIEF SECRETARY, GOVT. OF KARNATAKA, VIDHANA SOUDHA BENGALURU - 560 001. 2 . THE STATE OF KARNATAKA REP. BY THE SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF ANIMAL HUSBANDRY AND FISHERIES, VIKASA SOUDHA BENGALURU - 560 001. 3 . THE STATE OF KARNATAKA REP. BY THE SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE, M.S. BUILDING, BENGALURU - 560 001. Digitally signed by AMBIKA H B Location: High Court of Karnataka - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC:18154-DB WP No. 11822 of 2024 4 . THE STATE OF KARNATAKA REP. BY THE SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF BACKWARD CLASSES VIKASA SOUDHA BENGALURU - 560 001. 5 . THE STATE OF KARNATAKA REP. BY THE PRL. SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE AND INDUSTRIES, VIKASA SOUDHA BENGALURU - 560 001. 6 . THE COMMISSIONER BENGALURU DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY, 5TH MAIN ROAD, KUMARAPARK WEST, GUTTAHALLI BENGALURU - 560 020. 7 . THE COMMISSIONER BRUHAT BENGALURU MAHANAGARA PALIKE N.R. SQUARE, CORPORATION, BENGALURU - 560 002. 8 . THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR KARNATAKA INDUSTRIAL AREA DEVELOPMENT BOARD, 49, 4TH AND 5TH FLOOR, 'EAST WING', KHAJIJA BHAVAN, RACE COURSE ROAD, BENGALURU - 560 001. 9 . THE SECRETARY DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE AND INDUSTRIES, (MSME AND MINES), VIKASA SOUDHA BENGALURU - 560 001. 10 . THE ADDL. CHIEF SECRETARY DEPARTMENT OF CO-OPERATION M.S. BUILDING BENGALURU - 560 001. - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC:18154-DB WP No. 11822 of 2024 11 . THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION HIGHER EDUCATION, M.S. BUILDING, BENGALURU - 560 001. 12 . THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY DEPARTMENT OF SCHOOL EDUCATION AND LITERACY M.S. BUILDING, BENGALURU - 560 001. 13 . THE ADDITIONAL CHIEF SECRETARY DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY VIKASA SOUDHA BENGALURU - 560 001. 14 . THE ADDITIONAL CHIEF SECRETARY DEPARTMENT OF FINANCE VIDHANA SOUDHA BENGALURU - 560 001. 15 . THE SECRETARY DEPARTMENT OF FOOD AND CIVIL SUPPLIES VIKASA SOUDHA BENGALURU - 560 001. 16 . THE ADDITIONAL CHIEF SECRETARY DEPARTMENT OF FOREST, ECOLOGY AND ENVIRONMENT M.S. BUILDING BENGALURU - 560 001. 17 . THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND FAMILY WELFARE VIKASA SOUDHA BENGALURU - 560 001. 18 . THE ADDITIONAL CHIEF SECRETARY DEPARTMENT OF HOME VIDHANA SOUDHA BENGALURU - 560 001. - 4 - NC: 2025:KHC:18154-DB WP No. 11822 of 2024 19 . THE PRINCPAL SECRETARY DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING VIKASA SOUDHA BENGALURU - 560 001. 20 . THE SECRETARY DEPARTMENT OF HORTICULTURE M.S. BUILDING BENGALURU - 560 001. 21 . THE SECRETARY DEPARTMENT OF IT AND BT M.S. BUILDING BENGALURU - 560 001. 22 . THE SECRETARY DEPARTMENT OF INFRASTRUCTURE AND DEVELOPMENT VIKASA SOUDHA BENGALURU - 560 001. 23 . THE SECRETARY DEPARTMENT OF KANNADA AND CULTURE VIKASA SOUDHA BENGALURU - 560 001. 24 . THE SECRETARY DEPARTMENT OF INFORMATION AND PUBLIC RELATION VIKASA SOUDHA BENGALURU - 560 001. 25 . THE SECRETARY DEPARTMENT OF LABOUR VIKASA SOUDHA BENGALURU - 560 001. 26 . THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY DEPARTMENT OF LAW JUSTICE AND HUMAN RIGHTS VIDHANA SOUDHA BENGALURU - 560 001. - 5 - NC: 2025:KHC:18154-DB WP No. 11822 of 2024 27 . THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY DEPARTMENT OF MEDICAL EDUCATION M.S. BUILDING BENGALURU - 560 001. 28 . THE SECRETARY DEPARTMENT OF MINORITIES WELFARE HAJ AND WAKF VIKASA SOUDHA BENGALURU - 560 001. 29 . THE SECRETARY DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING M.S. BUILDING BENGALURU - 560 001. 30 . THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS PORTS AND IWT VIKASA SOUDHA BENGALURU - 560 001. 31 . THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE M.S. BUILDING BENGALURU - 560 001. 32 . THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE DISASTER MANAGEMENT M.S. BUILDING BENGALURU - 560 001. 33 . THE ADDL. CHIEF SECRETARY DEPARTMENT OF RDPR M.S. BUILDING BENGALURU - 560 001. 34 . THE ADDL. CHIEF SECRETARY ( PANCHAYAT RAJ ) DEPARTMENT OF RD & PR - PANCHAYAT RAJ M.S. BUILDING BENGALURU - 560 001. - 6 - NC: 2025:KHC:18154-DB WP No. 11822 of 2024 35 . THE PRINCPAL SECRETARY DEPARTMENT OF SOCIAL WELFARE VIKASA SOUDHA BENGALURU - 560 001. 36 . THE ADDITIONAL CHIEF SECRETARY DEPARTMENT OF SKILL DEVLEOPMENT M.S. BUILDING BENGALURU - 560 001. 37 . THE SECRETARY DEPARTMENT OF TOURISM VIKASA SOUDHA BENGALURU - 560 001. 38 . THE SECRETARY DEPARTMENT OF TRASNPORT M.S. BUILDING BENGALURU - 560 001. 39 . THE ADDITONAL CHIEF SECRETARY DEPARTMENT OF URBAN DEVELOPMENT VIKASA SOUDHA BENGALUR - 560 001. 40 . THE SECRETARY DEPARTMENT OF UDD (MUNS AND UDA) VIKASA SOUDHA BENGALURU - 560 001. 41 . THE ADDL. CHIEF SECRETARY DEPARTMENT OF WATER RESOURCES VIKASA SOUDHA BENGALURU - 560 001. 42 . THE SECRETARY DEPARTMENT OF WATER RESOURCES - MINOR IRRIGATION VIKASA SOUDHA BENGALURU - 560 001. - 7 - NC: 2025:KHC:18154-DB WP No. 11822 of 2024 43 . THE SECRETARY DEPARTMENT OF WCD M.S. BUILDING BENGALURU - 560 001. 44 . THE ADDL. CHIEF SECRETARY DEPARTMENT OF YOUTH EMPOWERMENT AND SPORTS M.S. BUILDING BENGALURU - 560 001. 45 . THE ADDL. CHIEF SECRETARY DEPARTMENT OF SCHEDULED TRIBES WELFARE VIKASA SOUDHA BENGAURU - 560 001. ... RESPONDENTS (SRI SHASHI KIRAN SHETTY, ADVOCATE GENERAL A/W SMT.NILOUFER AKBAR, ADDITIONAL GOVERNMENT ADVOCATE FOR RESPONDENT NOS.1 TO 5, 9 TO 45) --- THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO ISSUE A WRIT OF MANDAMUS OR ANY OTHER APPROPRIATE WRIT, ORDER/S, DIRECTION/S TO RESPONDENTS TO ENSURE COMPLIANCE OF THE ORDERS/DIRECTIONS/JUDGMENTS PASSED BY THIS HON'BLE COURT OR ANY OTHER COURT IN LETTER AND SPIRIT & ETC. THIS WRIT PETITION HAVING BEEN HEARD AND RESERVED FOR JUDGMENT, COMING ON FOR PRONOUNCEMENT THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS PRONOUNCED AS UNDER: - 8 - NC: 2025:KHC:18154-DB WP No. 11822 of 2024 CORAM: HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR. JUSTICE N. V. ANJARIA and HON'BLE MR JUSTICE K. V. ARAVIND CAV JUDGMENT (PER: HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR. JUSTICE N. V. ANJARIA) The speedy implementation of judgments and compliance of the orders of the court without delay are inextricably interwoven in the enforcement of rule of law. It is part of the observance of rule of law. The implementation of the orders of the court cannot be segregated from justice delivery, rather it is an integral part of doing a complete justice to the litigants. There is an absolute obligation on part of the State or other authorities to which the orders of the court are directed for compliance, and it is the duty of the court to ensure the obedience of the orders. 1.1 One of the measures to judge democratic commitment of any government is the respect it accords to the orders of the court. At the same time, the real majesty of the courts lies in its vibrant existence and effective functioning. Such vibrancy and effectiveness, in turn, could be achieved by ensuring - 9 - NC: 2025:KHC:18154-DB WP No. 11822 of 2024 implementation and obedience of the judgments and orders of the Court. 2. Be either it is total disregard of the orders of the court or there is an unreasonable delay in compliance of the directions of the court, both situations could be said to be on the same pedestal. In fact, no order of the court should lose its efficacy because of its non-compliance or compliance at such a belated stage which would render the compliance meaningless. The orders and directions of the court which are brought under contempt jurisdiction bear a testimony of such non-compliance or delayed compliance. 2.1 In Maninderjit Singh Bitta vs Union of India, [(2012) 1 SCC 273], it was with reference to the contempt jurisdiction of the Court itself that the Supreme Court stated thus. "It is also of some relevance to note that disobedience of court orders by positive or active contribution or non-obedience by a passive and dormant conduct leads to the same result. Disobedience of orders of the court strikes at the very root of rule of law on which the judicial system rests. The rule of law is the foundation of a democratic society. Judiciary is the guardian of the rule of law. If the Judiciary is to perform its duties and functions effectively and remain true to the spirit with which - 10 - NC: 2025:KHC:18154-DB WP No. 11822 of 2024 they are sacredly entrusted, the dignity and authority of the courts have to be respected and protected at all costs (refer T.N. Godavarman Thirumulpad vs. Ashok Khot, [(2006) 5 SCC 1] SCC p.6, para 5)" (para 26) 2.2 In Supreme Court Bar Association Vs Union of India, [(1998) 4 SCC 409], the Supreme Court underlined in paragraph of 42 of the judgment that the purpose of contempt jurisdiction is to uphold the majesty and dignity of Courts of law. It stated that the jurisdiction is not be exercised to protect the dignity of an individual judge, but to protect the administration of justice from being kept at a back seat. 2.3 In other words, compliance of the Court's orders and directions is imperative, else, it would have the tendency of shaking the confidence of public in the administration of justice. Long inaction and supine apathy towards compliance of the Court's orders and directions in a given case, tantamount to, obstruct the course of justice inasmuch as the compliance of the Court's order has to be viewed as an integral part of dispensation of justice and administration of justice. - 11 - NC: 2025:KHC:18154-DB WP No. 11822 of 2024 3. During the months of February and March, 2024, in course of conducting judicial proceedings, this court could notice several, and perhaps innumerable, instances of the cases filed under the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 wherein the directions and the orders of the court were not attended to by the authorities concerned despite passage of long time and that, they had remained without compliance. All these orders affected the rights of the litigants bearing importance in their life affairs. The situation obtained by non-compliance of the orders of the court for long stretch of time was prejudicial to the rights of litigants. 3.1 Having noticed such instances of non-compliance, this court in exercise of its powers under Article 226 of the Constitution, registered suo motu public interest petition expressing strong disapproval towards the inaction on part of the authorities who had filed in their duty in complying with the directions of this court and orders in various cases. Taking suo motu cognizance of such dismal situation, this court passed order dated 08.04.2024. 3.2 The court had noticed atleast the following sample cases where the orders and directions of the court were not complied with for a long period of time, - 12 - NC: 2025:KHC:18154-DB WP No. 11822 of 2024 (i) On 25th March 2024, the Court while dealing with contempt of court case, came across C.C.C. No.71 of 2024, in which order passed on 1st September 2023 by the learned Single Judge was found to be not complied with. The direction was only to consider and decide the application of the petitioner in respect of allotment of industrial site. The direction was issued by the Court upon assurance given by the learned counsel for the Karnataka Industrial Area Development Board. (ii) While dealing with the case on 25th March 2024, the Court came across C.C.C. No.332 of 2024, in which the order sought to be complied with was dated 26th July 2023. Eight to nine months had passed by. The respondent was required to conclude the enquiry within time bound period. (iii) In C.C.C. No.306 of 2024, posted on 25th March 2024, judgment and order dated 5th January 2023 passed almost 15 months back was not obeyed with. What was to be complied with was to complete the joint survey by the Forest Department with the participation of the petitioner. The directions remain uncomplied with for unreasonably long time. (iv) On 26th March 2024, the Court had an occasion to deal with C.C.C. No.107 of 2024, wherein the directions brought under contempt were with regard to deciding the representations of the petitioner for effecting the mutation entry pursuant to Grant Certificate issued on 7th November 2018, to be decided within three months. It was the order of learned Single Judge passed as back as on 6th March, 2023, which remained to be complied with, even after passage of one year. (v) Another C.C.C. No.235 of 2024 posted on 26th March 2024. Therein, it was order of the learned Single Judge passed on 11th September 2023, that - 13 - NC: 2025:KHC:18154-DB WP No. 11822 of 2024 was not complied with. Therein, again only representation was to be decided by the competent authority, that too on the basis of the decision of the Division Bench of this Court in W.A. No.42/2013. (vi) In C.C.C. No.236 of 2024, which the Court dealt with again on 26th March 2024, the order of learned Single Judge dated 10th October 2023 was not complied with. Here also, Writ Petition was disposed of and the respondents were directed to consider the representation of the petitioner in accordance with the judgment of the Division Bench of this Court confirmed by the Apex Court. (vii) Similarly, in C.C.C. No.237 of 2024, dealt with on 26th March 2024, it was the directions contained in the order dated 11th September 2023, not attended to and not complied with. (viii) In C.C.C. No.123 of 2024 dealt with on 1st April 2024, the directions are to be complied with which is the order passed by the learned Single Judge as back as in November 2022. The directions relate to payment of balance amount of compensation as per the entitlement adjudged by the learned Single Judge. (ix) Similarly, in C.C.C. No.75 of 2024 dealt with on 1st April 2024, it was order dated 27th January 2023 which was sought to be complied with which was with regard to deciding the application of the complainant for regularization of the unauthorized occupation by placing it before the Committee. Thirteen months have passed by. (x) C.C.C. No.1188 of 2023 - yet another contempt petition dealt with on 1st April 2024, was in respect of non-compliance of the directions passed on 26th June 2023, whereby, only thing to do by the respondent authority was to decide the - 14 - NC: 2025:KHC:18154-DB WP No. 11822 of 2024 representation of the petitioner within the stipulated time. (xi) It was order dated 14th September 2022, whereby also, learned Single Judge directed to decide representation within two months which was brought under contempt jurisdiction as having not been complied with in C.C.C. No.485 of 2023. 3.3 The State of Karnataka and other authorities such as Bangalore Development Authority (BDA), Bruhat Bengaluru Mahanagara Palike (BBMP), Karnataka Industrial Areas Development Board (KIADB), etc. were called upon by issuing of notice to explain their conduct and clarify their stand about the non- compliance of the orders of the court. 3.4 The State and the other limbs of the State were called upon to respond to the court in respect of following aspects, "(i) What method and procedure is adopted after and once orders or judgments of the High Court, or any other Court, are received by the Department or in the office of competent authority? (ii) Whether any special branch or designated authority is made functional, to treat, deal with and act upon, the orders and directions by the courts to take them to their logical end of compliance? (iii) Whether any machinery or mechanism is created internally in the Department or governmental bodies for ensuring compliance of the directions of the courts - 15 - NC: 2025:KHC:18154-DB WP No. 11822 of 2024 as may be required as per the orders and judgments of the courts? (iv) What steps are generally taken by the authorities concerned to attend to, to supervise, to monitor and to effectuate the orders and directions of the courts? (v) Whether any disciplinary measures are evolved or taken against the erring Officers who are found to be sitting tight over the orders and directions of the courts or those who are guilty of non-compliance within the time stipulated in the order or within reasonable time?" 3.5 The court observed in its suo motu order that the proceedings were initiated not as a fault finding exercise; the purpose was to ensure that the procedure for compliance of the orders and directions of the court at the end of State, its departments and other State authorities are streamlined. It was thought necessary that at the hierarchy of the government, proper and effective machinery is created to oversee the regard, respect and implementation of the court's orders. 3.6 In pursuance of the aforesaid suo motu order dated 08.04.2024 passed by this Court as above, a public interest Writ Petition (Suo Motu) No.11822 of 2024 was registered through the Registrar General of this Court and the authorities named in the order were served with the notices. - 16 - NC: 2025:KHC:18154-DB WP No. 11822 of 2024 3.7 The State Government responded to the suo motu public interest petition by filing different affidavits. 4. Learned advocate Mr. Madhukar Deshpande appeared for the petitioner to assist the Court in the cause. Learned Advocate General for the State Mr. K. Shashi Kiran Shetty with learned Additional Government Advocate Smt. Niloufer Akbar represented respondent Nos.1 to 5 and 9 to 45. Learned Advocate General and learned Additional Government Advocate took a fair stand and never treated this suo motu petition to be an adversarial litigation in making their submissions, which is indeed appreciable and was appreciated by the court. 4.1 Learned Additional Government Advocate Mr. Mohammed Jafar Shah filed memo dated 05.06.2024 in which, at the outset, the State dealt with the status of eleven contempt cases mentioned in the suo motu order in which the orders were noticed to have been not complied with for unbearably long. Along with the memo, the documents in the nature of compliance affidavits were also filed. In respect of five aspects about the compliance machinery and the modalities adopted by the authorities for compliance of the - 17 - NC: 2025:KHC:18154-DB WP No. 11822 of 2024 orders of the court as highlighted in the suo motu order, the State responded by placing on record the affidavits from time to time. 4.2 The stand evinced on part of the State Government was to submit that the State of Karnataka has enacted the Karnataka Conduct of Government Litigation Act, 2023 (Act of 28 of 2023) (hereinafter referred to as "the Karnataka Litigation Act, 2023"). This Act received accent of His Excellency the Governor of Karnataka as on 27.07.2023. It was pointed out that the main object of the said enactment was to empower State Government to deal with the legal matters swiftly, diligently and effectively streamlining the litigation processes. It was submitted that by compliance of provisions of the said Act, the State Government has endeavoured to ensure transparency and accountability, including to see that the implementation of the orders of the Court are expedited. 4.2.1 Connecting the five issues raised in the suo motu order with the provisions of the Litigation Act, 2023, it was highlighted thus in the affidavit, - 18 - NC: 2025:KHC:18154-DB WP No. 11822 of 2024 (i) Section 28 answers about the method of processing adopted post passing of orders by the High Court or other courts which are received in the department. (ii) Sections 31 to 53, 73 and 74 answers the aspect as to which designated authority is functional to deal with the orders of the Court to take them to their logical end. (iii) Section 2(h) and Section 53 of the Act is the reflective of the machinery or mechanism created internally in the department for compliance of the orders of the Court. (iv) Sections 27, 28, 29, 52, 56, 58, 61 and 74 would go to show that the steps are generally taken by the authorities to attend, supervise and monitor the implementation of the orders and directions of the Court. (v) The Karnataka Civil Services Rules, 1957 and the Karnataka Civil Services (Conduct) Rules, 1966 is the mechanism followed to initiate the disciplinary action against the defaulting officers. 4.3 It is appreciable that the affidavits in response to the cause for compliance of the court's order came to be filed by the Chief - 19 - NC: 2025:KHC:18154-DB WP No. 11822 of 2024 Secretary, State of Karnataka himself/herself showing the responsible approach to the issue on their part. 4.4 The Chief Secretary of the Government of Karnataka in his affidavit responded to each of the four questions to outline the steps taken and method adopted for complying with the orders of the court. 4.4.1 About the first aspect as to what method or procedure is adopted once the orders of the court are received by the departments, it is stated thus, (a) Once the judgment is pronounced, the Government Advocate after obtaining certified copy, would forward the same to the head of the legal cell concerned along with his opinion. (b) The head of legal cell will submit the same to the department. (c) Soon after the receipt of the requisition, the Secretary or the Head of Department will give necessary directions and after obtaining opinion from the Law Department, process the same for implementation. - 20 - NC: 2025:KHC:18154-DB WP No. 11822 of 2024 4.4.2 In response that whether any special branch or designated authority is created to deal with the orders of the court, it was stated, (a) The Litigation Conducting Officer monitors the cases pending before different courts and the stages of such cases. As per Section 22(3) of the Litigation Act, 2023, the Departmental Secretary and the Head of the Department would ensure that this monitoring by the Litigation Conducting Officer remains effective. (b) As per Section 28(1) of the Act, upon receipt of the certified copy of the order/judgment or decree, the Law Department will decide about preferring appeal, revision or review there against. (c) The legal cell will come to conclusion, as per Section 28(4) as to whether the judgment is to be taken to appeal, etc. (d) The final decision shall be taken by the Law Secretary and along with the opinion of the Law Department, it will be forwarded for next stage of action. 4.4.3 About the internal machinery in the department to comply the directions, the State stated that, - 21 - NC: 2025:KHC:18154-DB WP No. 11822 of 2024 (a) If the government decides not to prefer the appeal, review or revision then, Litigation Conducting Officer will take steps to implement the order. (b) In Writ Petition No.41189 of 2017 order came to be passed by this Court on 19.03.2020 directing the Government of Karnataka to pass necessary orders to monitor the time limit for the compliance of the court orders. Accordingly the Government Order dated 06.12.2020 has been issued. (c) The Court Case Monitoring System (CCMS) has been compulsorily implemented in all the departments, office of the Advocate General at Bengaluru, as also at Dharwad and Kalaburagi Benches of the High Court. (d) In respect of the cases other than the criminal cases, the case monitor system is adopted. All the cases pending before the court are provided separate file numbers. (e) A committee has been formed under the chairmanship of the Additional Chief Secretary, Government of Karnataka. As per the directions of this court, the Government Order dated 22.05.2024 is issued in this regard. - 22 - NC: 2025:KHC:18154-DB WP No. 11822 of 2024 (f) It is ensured that the court cases monitoring system is used and employed effectively by all concerned. (g) Government advocates are instructed to give their opinion to the head of the Legal Department about the compliance of the final orders passed by the court within one week. The heads of the Legal Departments are required to give their opinion within further period stipulated as to whether the appeal deserves to be preferred or not. 4.4.4 About the fourth question dealing with the supervision and monitoring of the compliance of the directions of the court, it is stated that as per Section 74 of the Karnataka Litigation Act, 2023 duty is fixed on every head of department people effective watch and control over the litigations in all the wings of the department concerned and that they are required to supervise the progress personally. 4.4.5 About the last question as regards the disciplinary measures which may be contemplated against the erring officers, the State has responded that circulars and guidelines are issued regarding - 23 - NC: 2025:KHC:18154-DB WP No. 11822 of 2024 initiation of disciplinary measures as per the Karnataka Civil Services (Classification, Control and Appeal) Rules, 1957. 4.4.6 What is lastly stated is that the State Government has approved the creation of "Implementation Cell" within the Department of Law headed by the Law Secretary to oversee and follow up the implementation of the judgments and orders passed by the Supreme Court or High Court or any other courts in the State of Karnataka. It is stated that in addition to creation of Implementation Cell, designated posts are also intended to be created. 4.5 On behalf of the Bruhat Bengaluru Mahanagara Palike (BBMP) also a response affidavit was placed on record affirmed by the Special Commissioner (Revenue and Information Technology). In the said affidavit, below mentioned aspects are highlighted, (i) Government Order dated 06.12.2020 is issued dealing with the detailed mechanism and step-by-step process for a time-bound compliance of the orders and directions of the Court, which is done in light of the order dated 19.03.2020 of this Court in Writ Petition No.41189 of 2017. - 24 - NC: 2025:KHC:18154-DB WP No. 11822 of 2024 (ii) As a part of the Government Order, the State Government has developed a Court Case Monitoring System (CCMS) through National Information Centre (NIC) wherein all cases where the State Government or its agencies including BBMP are party, the cases are tracked for its time-bound monitoring and compliance of the orders. (iii) The very CCMS has been rolled out in the BBMP. The process of operation thereof is indicated by Circular dated 05.04.2024 for the High Court was mentioned in which it is provided that every case where the BBMP is a respondent, Special BBMP counter/cell shall be served copy of the petition and other papers. It is stated that thereafter the same is electronically processed for its various stages, compliance report is obtained and thus the cases are monitored in respect of filing and implementation. (iv) It is stated that pursuant to the order of this Court in the present proceedings, the BBMP has further activated itself to ensure quick compliance of the orders of the Court. Training to the staff and the officers have been undertaken and by 15.06.2024, it was proposed to conclude undertaking for everyone. It was - 25 - NC: 2025:KHC:18154-DB WP No. 11822 of 2024 claimed that the training process would enable to identify officers who is responsible for causing delay. 4.6 Karnataka Industrial Area Development Board (KIADB) has also taken a stand by filing response affidavit through the Chief Executive Officer and Executive Member wherein it is stated that directions and orders of the Court are intimated by the advocate of the Board along with the certified copy of the order of the Legal Department. Upon receipt of such copies, Legal Department verifies the same and forwards them to the Zonal Office. It is stated that in every zonal office, post of Legal Coordinate Officer is created who is responsible for following up and implement the orders of the Court, to thereafter submit compliance report to the legal branch. It is stated that Circular dated 13.10.2018 has been issued to all Zonal Officers to ensure that the above mechanism remains workable. It is lastly submitted that to ensure compliance of the directions and orders of the Court, a Nodal Officer is appointed on 28.05.2024 for implementation of the orders. 4.7 The Commissioner, Bangalore Development Authority (BDA) filed a response stating that once the copy of the order of the Court is received by the Law Section, decision is taken by the Law Officer - 26 - NC: 2025:KHC:18154-DB WP No. 11822 of 2024 whether the judgment or order is to be appealed against or not. In the event appeal is to be filed, the papers are sent to the department concerned. It is stated that Law Officer has been appointed specially and specifically to deal with the contempt matters. It is stated that Note dated 05.12.2020 has been issued from the office of the Commissioner to all the officers requiring them to comply with the orders of the Court within time. Also referred to was the Circular dated 07.02.2023 issued by the BDA for attending to the Court cases promptly and properly and it is provided that action would be initiated against the erring officers. 4.7.1 According to BDA various reasons are attributable for slow or delayed compliance of the order of Court and resultant initiation of contempt proceedings. 4.7.2 It is stated that suggestion is given to software developers that orders which need immediate compliance are seen with alert on the webpage of the officer concerned including indication of time needed for compliance. It is stated that the order of the Court is seen by the BDA to be opportunity to put in place a robust system which would ensure timely implementation of the various directions - 27 - NC: 2025:KHC:18154-DB WP No. 11822 of 2024 given by the Court and that the litigants and general public do not feel frustrated because of compliance of the orders. 4.7.3 The factors are identified as under, (a) Understaffing, (b) the officers are also burdened with work of public importance as land acquisition and allotment has a high scale of interaction with the public requiring more time. (c) the extent of land being development by BDA has substantially increased since 1991 posing challenges to the existing staff. (d) old and settled claims are being continuously revived by giving additional representations. (e) Institutional memory is lost when officers and staff are transferred requiring new officers to spend more time on studying files and complying with the order. (f) challenges arising out of inter departmental dependability also lead to loss of time. 5. The response by the Bangalore Development Authority for the delay in compliance of orders of the courts could be said to be one of less humility. It touches impropriety. Instead of showing the committedness to discharge the duty to abide by the court's order and to evolve mechanism for that purpose, the BDA in its affidavit, has proceeded to suggest to the court factors because of which the BDA finds it difficult to comply with the court's order. It is entirely - 28 - NC: 2025:KHC:18154-DB WP No. 11822 of 2024 the domain of BDA to ensure that the mechanism is set up and the orders of the court are complied with, nothing else, rather than pointing out difficulties. 5.1 It does not augur in good taste on part of the 'State' authority like BDA, when it is responding to the court's suo motu notice about the non-compliance of the court's order and mandating for the compliance, to suggest that the officers are burdened with the work of public importance, or that the land acquisition and allotment cases need greater attention and interaction with the public and that they consume time. It is suggested that the work of the BDA has increased since 1991. This is thoroughly irrelevant when it comes to the compliance of the orders of the court. The ground of under staffing is the concern of the BDA. Transfer of the officers or that they have to spend more time to study the files for compliance of the orders of the court, is an audacious approach and an unacceptable ground advanced. It is expected that BDA shall desist in responding the court cases with such grounds and considerations and thereby to stray from the point in issue. The approach in furthering such ground by BDA is highly depricable and deserved to be castigated. - 29 - NC: 2025:KHC:18154-DB WP No. 11822 of 2024 5.2 It is worthwhile to have a overview of the provisions of the Karnataka Litigation Act, 2023, the provisions of which are projected and pressed into service by the State trying to submit that it has been following an effective machinery to comply with the orders and directions of the court, as per and in compliance of the provisions of the said Act as the object of the Act is stated to ensure efficient and responsible conduct in the matter of handling governmental litigation before the law courts and statutory tribunals. The provisions of the Act are made to apply to the conduct of litigation by or on behalf of the Government of Karnataka or any officers of the government in his official capacity before law courts and statutory tribunals in the State, 5.2.1 Section 3 which contains the definitions, defines the "case" in Section 3(1)(a) to mean any proceeding pending in a Court of Law where the government is a party. In Section 3(1)(e), "Head of the Legal Cell" is defined. "Law Officer" is defined in the said clause (g). "Legal Cell" is defined in sub-clause (h). "Litigation Conducting Officer " means, in relation to each case, the officer is placed in- charge of the conduct of the litigation as per the definition in Section 3 (1) (i). - 30 - NC: 2025:KHC:18154-DB WP No. 11822 of 2024 5.2.2 Chapter III titled cases filed by the government deals with the government permission required for institution of cases which is Section 4. The procedure for institution is provided for in Section 5. Sanction for prosecution is Section 6 whereas, preparation of plaint and procedure after presentation are the provisions mentioned in Sections 7 and 8, respectively. 5.2.3 Section 9 deals with the responsibilities of the Litigation Conducting Officer. The Section in its sub-section (1) provides that it shall be the duty of the Litigation Conducting Officer to regularly watch the progress of the case and to give necessary instructions to the Law Officer to whom the case is entrusted, at all stages till the final disposal of the case. Before instructing the Law Officer, wherever necessary, he shall obtain the order of his official superior or any higher officer in such manner as he considers proper. 5.2.4 As per sub-section (2) the Litigation Conducting Officer shall, wherever necessary or expedient, take steps for obtaining appropriate interlocutory orders like attachment before judgment, temporary injunction, order of status-quo ante and the like and shall take such other steps as are available under the code of Civil - 31 - NC: 2025:KHC:18154-DB WP No. 11822 of 2024 Procedure or other laws for protection and preservation of government property and for the effective prosecution of the case." 5.2.5 Section 10 speaks about the procedure in urgent cases whereas, Section 11 deals with the procedure in relation to notice under Section 80 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908. Section 12 is examination of claim whereas, Section 13 says that the provisions of Sections 4 to 10 and 12 shall apply to the writ petitions by the Government. 5.2.6 Chapter III in its group of Sections 14 to 20 are devoted to the cases filed against the government bearing summons and appearance, preparing defense statement, etc. In this, Section 20 deals with the duties of the Litigation Conducting Officer who shall watch the progress of the case regularly and furnish all the information on records, as may be required by the authorised Law Officer. The procedure for conduct of cases are delineated in cluster of Sections in 21 to 28 beginning from framing of issues till deciding about the appeallable cases. 5.2.7 Chapter V is about appeal, review and revision. Chapter VI deals with the writ petitions filed against the government, whereas - 32 - NC: 2025:KHC:18154-DB WP No. 11822 of 2024 Chapter VII pertains to the Supreme Court litigations. Chapter VIII contains special provisions regarding land acquisition cases, authorisation to conduct such cases, documents to be made available and other procedural and substantive requirements to be fulfilled in land acquisition cases. 5.2.8 Chapter IX is regarding cases before the Motor Accident Claims Tribunals. Chapter X contains the provisions with title "Execution Cases". The provisions mainly deal with the execution of the orders after it is made in favour of the Government, the Litigation Officer shall proceed after obtaining copy to get the decree executed or to recover the money, as the case may be. Chapters XI and XII which are the last two chapters are in relation to the criminal cases and miscellaneous provisions. 5.3 The survey of provisions of the Karnataka Litigation Act, 2023 highlighted above goes to show that the assemblage of the provisions in the said Statute especially and essentially deal with the conduct of litigation. They apply in respect of steps which the State Government, its departments and its officials are required to take in that area. The provisions of the Karnataka Litigation Act, 2023 intend to streamline the conducting of court cases by the - 33 - NC: 2025:KHC:18154-DB WP No. 11822 of 2024 State and for dealing with the procedure at their end for the purpose of responding to the court cases. 5.3.1 The provisions of the Act hardly deal with the aspect of quick compliance and emergent implementation of the orders of the court. 5.3.2 The following is observed in relation to the provisions of the Karnataka Litigation Act, 2023 which would suggest that the said law falls short of addressing the effective and speedy implementation and compliance of the court's order which are passed against the State, its department or authorities. (i) Chapter X of the Act which deals with the sections relating to the execution of cases, has no provision in respect of compliance of the orders passed by the court whether passed in the writ jurisdiction or for carrying out the directions and decrees of other courts. Even the provision regarding execution relate to those cases where the State is to execute the orders in its favour. The issue to be addressed is about the compliance of the directions issued to the State and its authorities to avail rights and entitlements to the litigants or the citizens. - 34 - NC: 2025:KHC:18154-DB WP No. 11822 of 2024 (ii) Section 28 of the Act is about procedure to be followed by the officer in-charge of the legal cell for preferring the appeal, etc. This Section is silent about the further action which may be taken to process the compliance of the orders of the court received in the departments of Government. (iii) There is a provision in the nature of Section 73(4) in respect of taking steps in satisfying the court's decree. However, no specific provision is found for compliance of the orders passed by the court in exercise of writ jurisdiction and other orders. (iv) There are no provisions explaining the steps which may be undertaken by the authority to attend, supervise, monitor and effectuate orders and directions passed by the court. There is no authority which may monitor the non-compliance of the court's orders. (v) The provisions are totally empty in terms of the internal machinery at the governmental level or departmental level for compliance of the writs of the court, directions of the courts and other orders of the court including compliance of the decree mandated against the government and its authorities. - 35 - NC: 2025:KHC:18154-DB WP No. 11822 of 2024 5.4 The provisions of the Act are silent about what an officer in the Government in particular department would do or is supposed to do to ensure the orders of the court are implemented without booking any delay and to further monitor that the orders are not subjected to contempt proceedings before the court and that the contempt jurisdiction is not required to be invoked by the litigants. It is to be viewed as an unwelcome situation that a litigant has to approach the court again under the contempt law for compliance and implementation of the court's orders which are passed in his/her favour long back remaining but remained unattended to by the addressee authorities. 5.5 Indeed, the right of relief for a litigant consists in immediate and undelayed fructification of the judgments and orders of the courts delivered in his favour. It could be viewed that right to reap the fruits of the relief granted by the court is, in a way, a fundamental right of a litigant-citizen, when right to approach the court itself is a fundamental right. - 36 - NC: 2025:KHC:18154-DB WP No. 11822 of 2024 5.6 In Subrata Roy Sahara vs Union of India and others, [(2014) 8 SCC 470], the Hon'ble Supreme Court, though in somewhat different context, highlighted that in our system of democratic governance, there is no escape from compliance of the orders of the Court. The Apex Court observed, "There is no escape from, acceptance, or obedience, or compliance with an order passed by the Supreme Court, which is the final and the highest Court in the country. Where would we find ourselves, if Parliament or a State Legislature insists, that a statutory provision struck down as unconstitutional, is valid? Or, if a decision rendered by the Supreme Court in exercise of its original jurisdiction is not accepted for compliance, by either the Government of India, and/or one or the other State Government(s) concerned? What if, the Government or instrumentality concerned, chooses not to give effect to a Court order, declaring the fundamental right of a citizen? Or, a determination rendered by a Court to give effect to a legal right, is not acceptable for compliance? Where would we be, if decisions on private disputes rendered between private individuals, are not complied with? The answer though preposterous, is not far-fetched. In view of the functional position of the Supreme Court depicted above, non-compliance with its orders would dislodge the cornerstone maintaining the equilibrium and equanimity in the country's governance. There would be a breakdown of constitutional functioning. It would be a mayhem of sorts." (para 17) - 37 - NC: 2025:KHC:18154-DB WP No. 11822 of 2024 6. The failure on part of the State Government to implement the orders or to sit tight over them for long period would attract the contempt jurisdiction and the erring official would be liable to be dealt with under the provisions of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 or any other Constitutional and legal provision dealing with the contempt of court. Although the contempt jurisdiction is special jurisdiction to be exercised sparingly, it is equally trite that whenever the act of non-compliance negates enjoyment of rights of the litigants and citizens flowing from a court order, or adversely affects the administration of justice or which stands to impede its course or tends to shake the public confidence in the judicial institution, the Courts have to be strict in compliance. 7. In view of the above, as it is noticed that in the Karnataka Litigation Act, 2023 there are no provisions, much less effective provisions, to handle and deal with the area of non-compliance of the writs, orders and directions of the court, the State Legislature would owe a duty to the system of administration of justice at large and to the individual litigants in particular, to enact by amending the said Act of 2023, so as to incorporate the special chapter containing the provisions providing for effective mechanism to - 38 - NC: 2025:KHC:18154-DB WP No. 11822 of 2024 implement the orders of the court without delay and for their timely compliance. Also needed is to have an express provision prescribing the time limit for compliance, and in that regard fixing the responsibility on the officer concerned. 8. The State Legislature is advised to enact the provisions on these lines. If the provisions are enacted in the Karnataka Litigation Act, 2023 to provide methods and mechanism for effectively dealing with and swiftly implementing the court's orders and directions, the State of Karnataka would be the first State of its kind to have provided the express statutory mechanism for the compliance of the court's order. 9. However, before the statutory provisions as suggested above are enacted, the following directions are issued which will meet the ends of justice, (i) In each department of the government, a designated officer shall be appointed to supervise the compliance of the orders passed by this Court or any other court received in that department. - 39 - NC: 2025:KHC:18154-DB WP No. 11822 of 2024 (ii) The designated officers shall have supporting staff dealing with the orders subject-wise or category-wise. The designated officer shall remain answerable for due and timely compliance. (iii) Each department of the government shall fix a time limit for compliance of the orders while fixing the time limit, subject matter of the order, nature of the order and the immediacy needed in implementation of the order shall be borne in mind. (iv) In ensuring the observance of time limit as above, which will be fixed, the designated officer shall remain responsible. A schedule shall be fixed for implementation. (v) Every department with the assistance of the designated officer shall prepare a fortnightly report containing number of orders which are not complied with and those orders which are complied with within such period. (vi) For non-compliance of the orders, the reasons shall be assigned in respect of each case to be placed before the head of the department for further processing towards the compliance. (vii) Such report shall be uploaded on the website of the department concerned so that the litigant is informed about the - 40 - NC: 2025:KHC:18154-DB WP No. 11822 of 2024 state of compliance of the orders for which he/she may be interested. (viii) The State Level Committee and the District Level Committee under Section 77, 78 or 79 of the Karnataka Litigation Act, 2023 have been presently assisting the departments in conducting the case only. These committees can be invested with the task and responsibility of timely compliance of the orders of the court by issuing necessary administrative instructions on that score. (ix) The technology should be employed to upload the details of the compliance of the various orders of the court to the benefit of the litigants. 10. Wherever the contempt cases are filed, the procedure should be prescribed by issuing necessary circulars directing the officials concerned to attend to the contempt cases on priority basis and so as to facilitate the compliance of the orders under contempt. If the appeals are filed against the orders brought under the contempt, they should be pursued expeditiously. The officers should otherwise deal with the compliance of the orders, if found to be negligent, indolent or indulging into delay in the compliance or implementation. - 41 - NC: 2025:KHC:18154-DB WP No. 11822 of 2024 10.1 Such erring officers shall be subjected to disciplinary proceedings. For this purpose, head of the department should collect the necessary details about the state and stage of various orders of the court received in the department for compliance and the details of the officers who is in-charge of the task of compliance. 11. Making the above observations and passing the above directions, the present suo motu proceedings are disposed of. Sd/- (N. V. ANJARIA) CHIEF JUSTICE Sd/- (K. V. ARAVIND) JUDGE AHB, DDU List No.: 1 Sl No.: 1