- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:49558-DB CCC No. 241 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 28TH DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2025 PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR. VIBHU BAKHRU, CHIEF JUSTICE AND THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE C.M. POONACHA CIVIL CONTEMPT PETITION NO. 241 OF 2025 BETWEEN: 1. SRI R. VENKATESH KUMAR S/O. SRI S/O LATE V. RAJKUMAR AGED ABOUT 61 YEARS R/AT NO.14, 9TH MAIN SREENIVAS NAGAR BANGALORE - 560 050 …COMPLAINANT (BY SMT. VEENA R. RAO, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. SHRI RAJESH KOHLI CHAIRMAN AND MANAGING DIRECTOR M/S HMT LIMITED (A GOVT. OF INDIA UNDERTAKING) DEPARTMENT OF HMT MACHINE TOOLS AUXILLARY BUSINESS DIVISION JALAHALLI BANGALORE - 560 013 …ACCUSED (BY SMT. PREETHI K., ADVOCATE) THIS CCC IS FILED UNDER SECTIONS 11 AND 12 OF THE CONTEMPT OF COURT ACT, 1971, AND THE CONTEMPT OF COURT PROCEEDINGS RULES, 1987 R/W ARTICLE 215 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, 1950 PRAYING TO ALLOW THIS CONTEMPT PETITION AND CONSEQUENTLY INITIATE CONTEMPT Digitally signed by AMBIKA H B Location: High Court of Karnataka - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:49558-DB CCC No. 241 of 2025 PROCEEDINGS AGAINST ACCUSED AND PUNISH THEM FOR THE WILFUL AND DELIBERATE DISOBEDIENCE OF THE ORDER DATED 26.07.2024 PASSED IN W.P. NO.14263/2023 PASSED BY THIS HON'BLE COURT. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. VIBHU BAKHRU, CHIEF JUSTICE and HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE C.M. POONACHA ORAL ORDER (PER: HON'BLE MR. VIBHU BAKHRU, CHIEF JUSTICE) 1. The complainant has filed the present complaint alleging willful disobedience of the order dated 26.07.2024 passed by the learned Single Judge in Writ Petition No.14263/2023 (S-RES). The operative part of the said order reads as under: "[a] The petition is disposed of permitting the petitioner to take possession of his belongings from the first respondent's office without prejudice to his rights to work out such remedies that would be available to him with the proper forum. [b] The petitioner is reserved liberty to file documents with Form-10D as is now mentioned with the respondent's Corporate Head Office within a week from today. If the petitioner files such Form and submits documents, the first respondent shall ensure the same is forwarded without delay in any event within a week under proper acknowledgment to the office of the concerned." - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:49558-DB CCC No. 241 of 2025 2. Insofar as permitting the complainant to take possession of his belongings is concerned, there is no dispute that the complainant has recovered his belongings. 3. The complainant had filed Form 10D with the corporate office of the accused and the same was also forwarded by the accused to the Employees' Provident Fund Organization [EPFO]. Thus, the accused has complied with the order. However, it is contented on behalf of the complainant that the documents forwarded along with Form 10D were forged and fabricated. The said contention is premised on the basis that a photocopy of the document was taken and an original stamp was placed on it. The learned counsel appearing for the accused stoutly contested the allegations of any forgery or fabrication. 4. The learned counsel for the accused has also filed a memo enclosing therewith the original documents forwarded to the EPFO. The said documents also include a letter dated 25.08.2025 sent by EPFO returning the claim Form 10D on the ground of certain deficiencies. The copy of the said letter sent by EPFO is available with the complainant. The EPFO has pointed out that the PF account of the complainant differs from the one in the claim - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:49558-DB CCC No. 241 of 2025 form. Additionally, KYC is not updated. The date of joining also differs from the date as submitted by the employer and office records. Additionally, it is stated that the complainant has two accounts and therefore, he has been requested to get his account transferred to the present account and resubmit the claim in Form 10D in the present account. 5. The learned counsel for the complainant submits that the complainant is not being entertained in the EPFO office and he is facing difficulties in resolving the issues. Whilst, the complainant may have a grievance with the office of the EPFO in this regard, the same does not imply that the accused has willfully disobeyed the orders passed by this Court. 6. In view of the above, the complaint is closed. 7. All remedies of the complainant for redressal of his grievance regarding the release of dues from the EPFO's Office are reserved. This order would not preclude the complainant to avail such remedies as available in law. 8. Needless to observe that the accused will cooperate with the complainant to assist him in ensuring that the dues are released. - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:49558-DB CCC No. 241 of 2025 9. The memo filed with the original documents is returned to the learned counsel for the accused. Sd/- (VIBHU BAKHRU) CHIEF JUSTICE Sd/- (C.M. POONACHA) JUDGE AHB List No.: 1 Sl No.: 15