Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Karnataka · body

2025 DAILYLAW 65991 (KAR)

K JAFFAR VALI S/O K HUSSAIN SABI v. SMT DEEPA CHOLAN

CCC/100223/2025 · 2025-09-11

S Sunil Dutt Yadav, Vijaykumar A Patil

Contempt Petitionbody2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:11759-DB CCC No. 100223 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA,AT DHARWAD DATED THIS THE 11TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2025 PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.SUNIL DUTT YADAV AND THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIJAYKUMAR A.PATIL CIVIL CONTEMPT PETITION NO.100223 OF 2025 BETWEEN: K JAFFAR VALI S/O K. HUSSAIN SABI AGE. 59 YEARS, JUNIOR ENGINEER, CITY MUNICIPAL CORPORATION, SIRUGUPPA BELLARI DISTRICT, R/O. NO.63, 27TH WARD, AZEEZ MANZIL, NEAR KHOORI THANA MOSQUE, SHARIF STREET, COWL BAZAR, BELLARI, BELLARI-583102. …COMPLAINANT (BY SRI. SHARANABASAWA B., ADVOCATE) AND: 1. SMT. DEEPA CHOLAN SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF URBAN DEVELOPMENT, 4TH FLOOR, VIKASA SOUDHA, BANGALORE-560001. 2. SHRI PRABHU LINGA KAVALI KATTI THE DIRECTOR OF MUNICIPAL ADMINISTRATION, VISHWESHWARAIAH TOWER, VIDHANA VEEDHI, BANGALURU-560001. …ACCUSED 3. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA, R/BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF URBAN DEVELOPMENT, VIKAS SOUDHA, BENGALURU-560001. …PROFORMA RESPONDENT (BY SRI. PRAVEEN K. UPPAR, HCGP) 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 INITIATE CONTEMPT PROCEEDINGS AGAINST THE ACCUSED/RESPONDENTS AND PUNISH THEM FOR THE WILLFUL DISOBEDIENCE OF THE ORDER DATED 10/06/2024 PASSED BY THIS HON’BLE COURT IN W.P.NO.101799/2018 VIDE ANNEXURE-A & ETC. Digitally signed by VINAYAKA B V Location: High Court of Karnataka, Dharwad Bench - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:11759-DB CCC No. 100223 of 2025 THIS CCC COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.SUNIL DUTT YADAV AND THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIJAYKUMAR A.PATIL ORAL ORDER (PER: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.SUNIL DUTT YADAV) The present contempt petition has been filed alleging the disobedience of the direction passed in WP No.101799/2018. The direction at para No.12 of the order in the writ petition is as follows: “12. In that view of the matter, the order of dismissal is set aside and the respondents authorities are directed to reinstate the petitioner with back wages and all the benefits, which he is entitled to in accordance with the law. Such exercise shall be done within a period of 8 weeks from date of receipt of certified copy of this order and shall notify the place of reporting by communication to the petitioner.” 2. An affidavit is filed by the Secretary to the Government Department of Urban Development, which is accompanied by Document No.1, which is the Government Order dated 28.11.2024, whereby the complainant has been - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:11759-DB CCC No. 100223 of 2025 reinstated and it is recited that the separate order would be passed regarding his benefits. Documents No.2 is the order dated 06.09.2025 whereby the authorities have considered the period of 08.12.2017 till the date of the complainant being taken back to work on 28.11.2024 as time spent on duty and it is ordered that necessary financial benefits would be disbursed. 3. In light of the same, we find that there is a substantial compliance of the order. 4. Learned counsel for the complainant submits that till the quantification is made, the grievance of the complainant would remain open and further all benefits ought to be granted. 5. Noticing that there is a substantial compliance, we drop the proceedings, while we expect that the State would take note of the directions at para No.12 and comply the same. In the event of any dispute even after the orders are passed by the respondent regarding the quantification of the entitlement of benefits as held at para No.12, it is needless to - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:11759-DB CCC No. 100223 of 2025 state that the complainant is at liberty to take appropriate proceedings. 6. It is needless to state in light of dropping of the proceedings while noticing that still no benefits are disbursed, the respondents-accused are to take steps for disbursal after completing all formalities within a period not later than six [6] weeks from today. Sd/- (S.SUNIL DUTT YADAV) JUDGE Sd/- (VIJAYKUMAR A.PATIL) JUDGE PJ, CT:VP LIST NO.: 1 SL NO.: 18