IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU ON THE 21ST DAY OF AUGUST, 2019 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAVI MALIMATH AND THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE H.P.SANDESH CCC NO.1221 OF 2018 (CIVIL) BETWEEN:
SRI B.V. SATYANARAYANA RAO SON OF LATE K.N. VISWESHWARAIAH, AGED ABOUT 70 YEARS, RESIDING AT FLAT NO.501, SRI RAKSHA PARADISE, 4TH CROSS, 1ST MAIN, MANJUNATHA NAGARA, UTTARAHALLI MAIN ROAD, KALLAHALLI, BENGALURU-560 061 PRESENTLY RESIDING AT NO.16, 5TH CROSS, VIJAYA BANK COLONY, DODDABANASAWADI, BENGALURU-560 043.
... COMPLAINANT (BY SRI SHANKARAPPA, ADVOCATE) AND:
1. SRI SIDDARAMAIAH THE CHIEF MINISTER OF KARNATAKA AND CHAIRMAN OF SELECTION COMMITTEE OF KANNADA RAJYOSTHAVA AWARD, VIDHANA SOUDHA, BENGALURU-560 001.
2. SMT. UMASHREE THE MINISTER FOR KANNADA AND CULTURE, GOVERNMENT OF KARNATAKA, AND ALSO CHAIRMAN OF ADVISED COMMITTEE OF KANNADA RAJYOSTHAVA AWARD, ROOM NO.252, 2ND FLOOR, VIDHANA SOUDHA, BENGALURU-560 001.
3. SRI VISHU KUMAR THE DIRECTOR OF DEPARTMENT OF KANNADA AND CULTURE, GOVERNMENT OF KARNATAKA, KANNADA BHAVANA, J.C. ROAD, BENGALURU-560 001.
4. SRI SIDDARAMAIAH AGED MAJOR, THE CHAIRMAN OF SELECTION COMMITTEE OF RAJYOTHSAVA AWARD, NO.498, SURAGI, 6-A MAIN, R.M.V. 2ND STAGE, BENGALURU-560 080.
... ACCUSED THIS CCC IS FILED UNDER SECTIONS 11 AND 12 OF THE CONTEMPT OF COURTS ACT, PRAYING TO TAKE COGNIZANCE AS AGAINST THE ACCUSED FOR WILLFUL DISOBEDIENCE OF THE ORDER OF THE LEARNED SINGLE JUDGE OF THIS HON'BLE COURT DATED 17.10.2017 IN WRIT PETITION NO.41665 OF 2017 ANNEXURE-H AND ALSO FOR AN ACT OF COMMITTEE AN OFFENCE UNDER THE CONTEMPT OF COURT ACT BY SECURING THE PRESENCE OF THE ACCUSED BEFORE THIS HON'BLE COURT AND SEND THEM FOR CIVIL PRISON BY CONVICTING THEM.
***** THIS CCC COMING ON FOR ORDERS THIS DAY, RAVI MALIMATH J., PASSED THE FOLLOWING:
ORDER This petition is filed on the ground that the order dated 17.10.2017, passed by the learned Single Judge in Writ Petition No.41665 of 2017 has been disobeyed. In terms of the aforesaid order, the submission made by the Additional Advocate General was placed on record and the petition was disposed off. Since compliance was not effected, the instant petition has been filed.
2. Office objection were raised at the inception as to how accused Nos.1 to 3 can be arrayed herein, since there is no direction against them by the learned Single Judge. From last one year, the matter has been adjourned with a request to comply with the office objections. Even today, the said office objection has not been with nor clarified by any court order.
3. We have considered the order of the learned Single Judge. The submission of the learned Additional Advocate General that the representation would be considered was placed on record. A reading of the entire order does not indicate as to which respondent was directed to consider the same. Even on questioning the learned counsel for the complainant, he is unable to point out as to who was directed to comply with the order of the learned Single Judge. Under these circumstances and in the absence of any specific directions to any respondents, we do not find any ground to entertain the petition. Hence, the petition is dismissed.
4. However, the dismissal of the contempt petition will not come in the way of the complainant to exercise such rights as available to him in law.
Sd/- Sd/-
JUDGE JUDGE JJ