- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:19159-DB CCC No. 455 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 8TH DAY OF APRIL, 2026 PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR. VIBHU BAKHRU, CHIEF JUSTICE AND THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE C.M. POONACHA CIVIL CONTEMPT PETITION NO. 455 OF 2025 BETWEEN: 1. SADASHIVAPPA S/O LATE SHIVANNA AGED ABOUT 74 YEARS RESIDING AT 308 POORVI AIRAVATHA 3RD MAIN, 1ST CROSS JUDICIAL LAYOUT, 2ND PHASE THALAGATTAPURA BENGALURU - 560 109. …COMPLAINANT (BY SRI GANGADHARAPPA A.V., ADVOCATE) AND: 1. DEEPAK CHAVAN FATHER'S NAME NOT KNOWN TO THE COMPLAINANT AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT URBAN DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT VIKAS SOUDHA, BENGALURU - 560 001 2. PRABHULINGA KAVALIKATTI FATHER'S NAME NOT KNOWN TO THE COMPLAINANT Digitally signed by VEERENDRA KUMAR K M Location: High Court of Karnataka - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:19159-DB CCC No. 455 of 2025 AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS COMMISSIONER AND DIRECTOR OF MUNICIPAL ADMINISTRATION VISHWESHWARAIAH TOWER BENGALURU - 560 001 ... ACCUSED 3. GOVERNMENT OF KARANTAKA REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY URBAN DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT VIKAS SOUDHA BENGALURU - 560 001 …PRO-FORMA RESPONDENT (BY SRI S.H. RAGHAVENDRA, AGA) THIS CCC IS FILED UNDER SECTIONS 11 AND 12 OF THE CONTEMPT OF COURTS ACT, PRAYING TO ISSUE NOTICE TO ACCUSED AND SUITABLY PUNISH THEM FOR THEIR WILFUL DISOBEDIENCE TO THE ORDER DATED 21.11.2024 PASSED IN W.P. NO.19268/2024, CERTIFIED COPY OF WHICH PRODUCED AS ANNEXURE-A. 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 21.11.2024 passed by the Co- ordinate Bench of this Court in W.P.No.19268/2024 (S-KSAT) - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:19159-DB CCC No. 455 of 2025 [impugned order]. The operative part of the said order reads as under: "In the above circumstances, this Petition is allowed and following directions are issued: [i] A Writ of Mandamus issues to the Respondents to sanction & release regular pension & all terminal benefits to the Petitioner within two months, with interest at the rate of 1% per mensum from the day the same have been withheld. [2] The rate of interest shall stand altered to 2% in the place of 1% per mensum with retrospective effect, if delay exceeds two months. Further, Respondents shall pay a cost of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Fifty Thousand) only to the Petitioner. [3] The interest & costs may be recovered from the erring officials of the concerned Departments, in accordance with law. Liberty is reserved to the Petitioner to make an appropriate representation to the Respondents to seek redressal of his grievance as to fitment of pay and such other things. If such a representation is made, the same shall be considered within a period of eight weeks on merits. The delay issue shall not be raised since the legal battle has been fought all through." 2. During the course of the present proceedings, the accused had filed compliance affidavit indicating the amounts paid to the complainant. However, the main dispute is regarding the payment of interest. 3. The accused has filed the last compliance affidavit on 06.04.2026 setting out in detail the calculation of the amounts paid. In - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:19159-DB CCC No. 455 of 2025 one of the tabular statements it is stated that it had calculated the interest at the rate of 2% per month as per the compliance affidavit filed on 02.04.2025. The learned counsel for the complainant submitted that this indicates that interest after 02.04.2025 has not been calculated. However, the reference to the date in the compliance affidavit is erroneous. It refers to compliance affidavit filed on 02.04.2026 and the interest has been calculated upto that date. 4. The complainant has also filed a rejoinder to the compliance affidavit dated 06.04.2026 to point out variation in the calculations. A plain reading of the said rejoinder indicates that the variation is on account of interest computed at `17,79,200/- on a sum of `3,12,663/- which is the part of complainant's salary that was withheld. The claim for the said sum arises on account of 50% salary that was withheld from 07.04.1998 to 08.03.2000, during which the complainant was placed under suspension. There is no dispute as to the amount of `3,12,663/- which has been remitted to the complainant's accounts today. 5. As noted above, the dispute is only regarding the interest on the said amount, which the complainant has computed at `17,79,200/-. - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:19159-DB CCC No. 455 of 2025 6. There is also a discrepancy in the computation of the earned leave encashment benefit i.e., a sum of `16,800/- on account of interest payable on the amount towards leave engagement benefit. 7. As far as the claim for interest of `17,79,200/- is concerned, the same is clearly not a part of the terminal benefits and therefore there is no order directing payment of this interest. Consequently, no proceedings for disobedience of order dated 21.11.2024 under the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 are maintainable on account of non-admission of this claim. 8. We also find no error in the Interest as calculated for the earned leave encashment benefit as computed by the accused. In any event, no proceedings for willful disobedience of the orders passed by this Court are required to be initiated on this account. 9. The complaint is, accordingly, closed. Sd/- (VIBHU BAKHRU) CHIEF JUSTICE Sd/- (C.M. POONACHA) JUDGE KMV List No.: 2 Sl No.: 18