REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY v. PRO FORMA
Case at a glance
- Bench
- C M JOSHI
- Neutral citation
- 2025:KHC:21676-DB
Outcome
Dismissed
Accordingly, the contempt petition is dismissed as
Provisions considered
- Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 ss. 11, 12(1)
Judgment
1. SRI MARAPPA SON OF SHANKARA, AGED ABOUT 39 YEARS R/AT WARD NO. 2, AMBEDKAR NAGAR, RAMANAGARAM, RAMANAGAR DISTRICT - 562 159.
2. SRI. MOHAN V SON OF VIJAY, AGED ABOUT 32 YEARS, WARD NO. 2, 3RD CROSS, NEAR ANNAMMA TEMPLE, AMBEDKAR NAGAR, RAMANAGARAM, RAMANAGAR DISTRICT - 562 159.
3. SRI BALINENI RAMANAPPA SON OF B. REDDAPPA, AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS, R/AT WARD NO. 2, AMBEDKAR NAGAR, RAMANAGARAM, RAMANAGAR DISTRICT - 562 159. Digitally signed by SUMATHY KANNAN Location: High Court of Karnataka (BY SRI SRINIVAS MANOHAR KULKARNI, ADVOCATE) …COMPLAINANTS - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC:21676-DB CCC No. 338 of 2025 HC-KAR AND:
THE STATE OF KARNATAKA DEPARTMENT OF TOWN PLANNING, VIKASASOUDHA, BENGALURU - 560 001, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY. …PRO FORMA RESPONDENT
SRI YASHVANTH.V.GURUKAAR, THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER, (AND ALSO THE PROJECT DIRECTOR, DISTRICT URBAN DEVELOPMENT CELL), RAMANAGAR DISTRICT, RAMANAGAR - 562 159.
SRI K.G. RAMESH CHIEF OFFICER THE TOWN MUNICIPAL COUNCIL BIDADI, BIDADI MAIN ROAD, BIDADI - 562 109. (BY SRI NAVEEN CHANDRASHEKAR, AGA) …ACCUSED THIS CCC IS FILED UNDER SECTIONS 11 AND 12(1) OF THE CONTEMPT OF COURT ACT, 1971, PRAYING TO INITIATE CONTEMPT PROCEEDINGS AGAINST THE ACCUSED PERSONS FOR SHOWING WILFUL DISRESPECT AND DISOBEDIENCE TO THE ORDER DATED 11.09.2024 PASSED IN W.P. NO.26747/2023 (S-RES) VIDE ANNEXURE-A TO THIS PETITION. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC:21676-DB CCC No. 338 of 2025 HC-KAR CORAM: HON'BLE MR V KAMESWAR RAO ,ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE C M JOSHI ORAL ORDER (PER: HON'BLE MR V KAMESWAR RAO, ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE) The learned counsel for the complainants has filed a memo. The same reads as under: "The Complainants submits respondents have complied with the orders passed in Writ Petition No.26747/2023 (S-RES)
11.09.2024. In this regard the official memorandum has been passed by the Respondents on 07.05.2025. The copy of the same is already furnished to complainants. Hence the above case may be dismissed / disposed in the interest of justice and equity. "
2. The learned counsel for the complainants states he shall withdraw the contempt petition. - 4 - NC: 2025:KHC:21676-DB CCC No. 338 of 2025 HC-KAR
Operative part
3. Accordingly, the contempt petition is dismissed as withdrawn. Sd/- (V KAMESWAR RAO) ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE Sd/- (C M JOSHI) JUDGE KS List No.: 1 Sl No.: 45
Questions this judgment answers
What did the Court decide in this case?
The Court recorded the following disposition: Accordingly, the contempt petition is dismissed as
Which statutory provisions did this judgment involve?
Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 — ss. 11, 12(1).
Precedent status how later indexed judgments have treated this case
No known negative treatment found in the Courts & Cases corpus.
This is a result about the indexed corpus, not a finding that the judgment remains good law. Coverage may be incomplete.