IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 1ST DAY OF AUGUST, 2025 PRESENT THE HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE ANU SIVARAMAN AND THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH RAI K CIVIL CONTEMPT PETITION NO.659 OF 2014 BETWEEN: SRI. RAVINDRA VIDYA SAMSTHE (R) REPRESENTED BY ITS PRESIDENT NOW SMT. YASHODHA D/O JARAPPA RESIDING AT: 2ND CROSS H.B. COLONY THYAGARAJA NAGARA CHALLAKERE TOWN CHITRADURGA DISTRICT-577 522 ...COMPLAINANT (BY SRI. OMKARESHA, ADVOCATE) AND: 1 . SRI. IKKERI THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER CHITRADURGA DISTRICT CHITRADURGA-577 522 2 . SRI. RAME GOWDA THE COMMISSIONER: THE DIRECTOR OF PRE-UNIVERSITY EDUCATION 18TH CROSS, MALLESHWARAM SAMPIGE ROAD BENGALURU-560 012 - 2 3 . SRI. SHIVANNA DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF PRE-UNIVERSITY & VOCATIONAL EDUCATION CHITRADURGA DISTRICT CHITRADURGA-577 522 …ACCUSED (BY Smt. NAMITHA MAHESH B.G., AGA FOR A1 TO A3) THIS CCC IS FILED U/Ss.11 & 12 OF THE CONTEMPT OF COURTS ACT PRAYING TO ISSUE SUMMONS TO THE ACCUSED FOR DISOBEYING THE ORDER DATED 08.02.2013 PASSED IN W.P.No.48008/2012 WHICH PASSED IN TERMS OF THE ORDER DATED 20.02.2009 PASSED IN W.P.No.8649/2005 C/W. 7284/2005 AND 20.09.2010 PASSED IN W.P. No.26847/2009. THIS PETITION HAVING BEEN HEARD AND RESERVED FOR JUDGMENT ON 30.07.2025 AND COMING ON FOR PRONOUNCEMENT OF JUDGMENT THIS DAY, ANU SIVARAMAN J., PRONOUNCED THE FOLLOWING: CORAM: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE ANU SIVARAMAN and HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH RAI K CAV JUDGMENT (PER: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE ANU SIVARAMAN) Heard the learned counsel appearing for the complainant and the learned Additional Government Advocate appearing for the accused. 2. This Contempt of Court Case is filed alleging non compliance of the order dated 08.02.2013 in W.P.No.48008/2012. The writ petition was filed inter-alia - 3 seeking directions to the Director, Pre-University Education to pay rent of the building to the petitioner. The direction in the said judgment was as follows:- "4. Such a prayer cannot be granted in this writ petition. The matter is still to be adjudicated by the concerned authorities as per the order dated 20.2.2009 passed in WP.No.8649/2005 and connected matters. It is for the petitioner to pursue the said matter before the concerned authority. Till then, no orders can be passed as prayed in the writ petition. Accordingly, the following order is made:- Respondents are directed to abide by the order dated 20.2.2009 passed in WP.No.8649/2005 and connected matter as early as possible, but not later than the outer limit of two months from the date of receipt of this order." 3. It is submitted that this Court by order dated 20.02.2009 in W.P.No.8649/2005 c/w. 7284/2005 had given directions in paragraph No.9, which reads as follows:- "9. In the result, I quash the impugned order but by directing the State Government to consider only the report of the administrator and thereafter pass the necessary orders within an outer limit of one month from the date of issuance of the certified copy of this order. For whatever reason, if the State Government wants to proceed under any other statute or code or rule, it is open to the State Government to do so but by confirming - 4 to the requirements of the said statute or code or rules. To safeguard the interest of both the parties, I direct the maintenance of status-quo until the decision is taken by the State Government afresh." 4. A compliance affidavit is filed by the learned AGA stating that the directions contained in the judgment have been complied with and the orders passed in compliance of the directions in the judgment have thereafter been challenged by the Complainant in W.P.No.21514/2016. The said Writ Petition came to be disposed of on 05.04.2023 quashing the impugned order and directing the State to restore the Management and assets of the Society through its office bearers. Alleging non compliance of the said directions, C.C.C. No.523/2024 was filed and is pending. It is submitted that it is therefore clear that the directions contained in the judgment dated 08.02.2013 in W.P.No.48008/2012 have been complied with and nothing survives for consideration. 5. Having considered the contentions advanced as well as the affidavit placed on record including the compliance affidavit dated 21.07.2025 as well as the - 5 rejoinder affidavit filed by the complainant dated 28.07.2025 and the pendency of W.A.No.990/2024 filed as against the judgment in W.P.No.21514/2016, we are of the opinion that nothing survives for consideration in this Contempt of Court Case. 6. Accordingly, this Contempt of Court Case is dropped. All other issues are left open to be considered in appropriate proceedings. Sd/- (ANU SIVARAMAN) JUDGE Sd/- (RAJESH RAI K) JUDGE cp*