- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC-K:2352-DB CCC No. 200047 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, KALABURAGI BENCH DATED THIS THE 16TH DAY OF APRIL, 2025 PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE K NATARAJAN AND THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE VIJAYKUMAR A. PATIL CIVIL CONTEMPT PETITION NO. 200047 OF 2025 BETWEEN: MANSOOR AHMED S/O LATE GHULAM MOHAMMED AGE: 42 YEARS R/O H.NO.12-11-118 ARAB MOHALLA RAICHUR …COMPLAINANT (BY SMT. SHRIDEVI SHARANABASAPPA, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, REVENUE DEPARTMENT VIDHANA SOUDHA BENGALURU – 560001. …PROFORMA PARTY 2. SRI NITISH K. IAS THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER & MAGISTRATE RAICHUR – 584101. 3. SRI JUBIN MOHAPATIA, IAS THE TOWN MUNICIPAL BY ITS COMMISSIONER Digitally signed by RAMESH MATHAPATI Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC-K:2352-DB CCC No. 200047 of 2025 RAICHUR – 584101. …ACCUSED (BY SRI MALLIKARJUNA C. BASAREDDY, GA FOR R1 & R2; SRI GOURISH S. KASHAMPUR, ADV. FOR R3) THIS CCC IS FILED UNDER SECTION 10 & 11 OF THE CONTEMPT OF COURT ACT R/W ARTICLE 215 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO PUNISH THE ACCUSED FOR COMMITTING THE CONTEMPT OF COURT WILLFULLY, KNOWINGLY DISOBEYED AND GROSSLY VIOLATED THE ORDER OF THIS HON’BLE COURT DTD. 22.08.2024 IN WP NO.203475/2014 OF ANNEXURE-A. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE K NATARAJAN AND HON'BLE MR JUSTICE VIJAYKUMAR A. PATIL ORAL ORDER (PER: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE VIJAYKUMAR A. PATIL) This contempt petition is filed alleging willful disobedience of the order dated 22.08.2024 passed in W.P.No.203475/2014 by the learned Single Judge of this Court. The operative portion of the said order reads as under: - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC-K:2352-DB CCC No. 200047 of 2025 i. “The writ petition is partly allowed. ii. The petitioner is permitted to submit a fresh representation along with all supporting documents, which shall be so submitted to both respondents No.1 and 2 within a period of 30 days from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. iii. If such a representation is submitted, respondents No.1 and 2 are directed to consider said representation within a period of 30 days thereafter and pass necessary orders either accepting or rejecting the said representation. iv. Needless to say, if the representation is rejected, necessary reasons to accompany such rejection orders..” 2. The learned counsel for respondent No.3 has filed a memo along with the endorsement dated 11.04.2025. It is submitted that the petitioner’s property was not utilized by the authorities. 3. In view of the specific endorsement dated 11.04.2025, the present contempt petition is closed with - 4 - NC: 2025:KHC-K:2352-DB CCC No. 200047 of 2025 a liberty to the petitioner/complainant to challenge the said endorsement, if so advised. Sd/- (K NATARAJAN) JUDGE Sd/- (VIJAYKUMAR A. PATIL) JUDGE MCR List No.: 1 Sl No.: 9 CT: PS