IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 20TH DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2019 PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ARAVIND KUMAR AND THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURAJ GOVINDARAJ C.C.C. NO.1201 OF 2019 (CIVIL) BETWEEN:
SRI. CHAVA CHINNAVEERA BHADRAIAH S/O LATE KOTAIAH REPRESENTED BY ITS REGISTERED POWER OF ATTPRMEU SRI. C. HANUMANTHA RAO S/O CHAVA CHINA VEERABHADRAIAH AGED ABOUT 69 YEARS OCCUPATION: ADVOCATE RESIDING AT SRI NILAYAM PLOT NO.361, ROAD NO.80 JUBILEE HILLS, HYDERABAD TELANGANA-500033 ... COMPLAINANT (BY SRI. VISHWANATH.H.M, ADVOCATE) AND:
1. SRI. T.M. VIJAY BHASKAR CHIEF SECRETARY THE STATE OF KARNATAKA VIDHANA SOUDHA VIDHANA VEEDHI BANGALORE-560001 2. SRI. GAURAV GUPTA PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, INDUSTRIES THE DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE AND INDUSTRY (INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT) REPRESENTED BY THE VIKASA SOUDHA, VIDHANA VEEDHI BANGALORE-560001 3. RESPONDENT NO.3 DELETED AS PER THE ORDER OF THE HON’BLE COURT DATED 23.09.2019 4. SMT. POORNIMA THE SPECIAL LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER-2 NO.49, 5TH FLOOR, KANIZA BHAVAN EAST WING, RACE COURSE ROAD BANGALORE-560001 ... ACCUSED (BY SRI. V. SREENIDHI, AGA FOR A1 AND A2;
A3 DELETED VIDE COURT ORDER DATED 23.09.2019; SRI. BASAVARAJ V. SABARAD, ADVOCATE FOR R4) ***** THIS CCC IS FILED UNDER SECTION 215 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA READ WITH SECTION 11 AND 12 OF THE CONTEMPT OF COURT, PRAYING TO INITIATE PROCEEDINGS FOR CONTEMPT AGAINST THE ACCUSED PERSONS FOR VIOLATING THE ORDERS PASSED BY THIS HON’BLE COURT IN I.A.NO.1/18 IN W.P.NO.6635/2014 & W.P.NO.7891-92/2014 C/W W.P.NO.33737/2013 (LA- KIADB) DATED 24.07.2018 AND PUNISH THE ACCUSED PERSONS FOR ACT OF CONTEMPT ON SUCH TERMS AS THIS HON’BLE COURT DEEMS FIT IN THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE.
THIS CCC COMING ON FOR ORDERS THIS DAY, ARAVIND KUMAR, J., PASSED THE FOLLOWING:-
O R D E R These proceedings have been initiated by petitioner in W.P.No.6635/2014 and W.P.Nos.7891- 92/2014 and connected with W.P.No.33731/2013 (LA- KIADB) contending inter alia that order passed in said Writ Petitions passed on 24.07.2018 vide Annexure-H has been willfully violated by respondents and as such, they are to be proceeded for committing contempt of court order.
2. We have heard Sri.Vishwanath H.M., learned advocate appearing for petitioner, Sri.Sreenidhi, learned Additional Government Advocate appearing for respondent Nos.1 and 2 and Sri.Basavaraj V.Sabarad, learned advocate appearing for respondent No.4. Respondent No.3 came to be deleted by order dated 23.09.2019.
3. The order which is alleged to have been violated reads:
“In the circumstances, the order of status quo granted by this Court on 17.12.2014 as well as subsequent order dated 12.06.2018 are modified by holding that the respondent Nos.1 and 2 are at liberty to pass orders in accordance with Section 28(4) of the Act, by considering the order passed by the fourth respondent, a copy of which is at Annexure-H to the writ petition. Respondents are restrained from interfering with the possession and right, title and interest of the petitioner vis-à-vis the lands in question until further steps by respondent Nos.1 and 2 are taken in accordance with law.”
4. A plain reading of above direction issued by learned Single Judge would disclose that while modifying the order of status-quo dated 17.12.2014 as well as subsequent order dated 12.06.2018, it came to be observed that respondent Nos.1 and 2 would be at liberty to pass orders in accordance with Section 28(4) of the Act by considering the order passed by respondent No.4 namely Annexure-H dated 03.12.2012 (Annexure-F in these proceedings). The respondents had also been restrained from interfering with the possession of petitioner vis-à-vis the said land.
5. It is the contention of learned advocate appearing for complainant that despite an order having been passed directing respondent Nos.1 and 2 to pass orders in accordance with Section 28(4) of the Act by considering the interim order dated 03.12.2012 (Annexure-F in these proceedings), same has not been considered in proper perspective and as such, respondents have willfully disobeyed the orders of this Court.
6. Per contra, learned advocate appearing for respondents would seek for proceedings being dropped since directions issued by learned Single Judge in the above Writ Petitions have been complied by passing the order on 19.09.2018 (Annexure-J in these proceedings).
7. Having regard to the rival contentions noticed hereinabove, we are of the considered view that the only direction issued to respondent Nos.1 and 2 is to pass orders in accordance with Section 28(4) of the Act by considering the order passed by 4th respondent, which is at Annexure-F in these proceedings and subsequent order dated 03.12.2012. Said order has infact been considered while passing the order on 19.09.2018 as referred to in the said order. In that view of the matter, correctness or otherwise of the said order cannot be now in the domain of consideration in these proceedings. It is brought to our notice that said order dated 19.09.2018 has since been challenged in the W.P.No.25236/2019 (Annexure-M in these proceedings) and an interim order has also been granted in favour of petitioner i.e., complainant. If it is so, it is open for the complainant to urge all grounds including the grounds urged in the present contempt proceedings in said W.P.No.25236/2019 and no opinion is expressed with regard to merits of the order dated 19.09.2018.
8. With these observations, contempt proceedings stands dropped.
Sd/- JUDGE Sd/- JUDGE Prs*