The High Court
Case Details
- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC:19430-DB CCC No.912/2022 C/W CCC NO.913/2022 HC-KAR IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 6TH DAY OF JUNE, 2025 PRESENT THE HON'BLE MRS. K.S.MUDAGAL AND THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIJAYKUMAR A. PATIL CIVIL CONTEMPT PETITION NO.912/2022 C/W CIVIL CONTEMPT PETITION NO.913/2022 Digitally signed by K S RENUKAMBA Location: High Court of Karnataka IN CIVIL CONTEMPT PETITION NO.912/2022 BETWEEN: 1. SMT. G.M. ROOPA W/O H.M. GURUMURTHY AGED ABOUT 48 YEARS R/AT. 7TH WARD, HARAPANAHALLI P.O. HARAPANAHALLI-583131 DAVANAGERE DISTRICT. 2. K. PRAKASHA S/O SWAGEERAPPA AGED ABOUT 46 YEARS R/AT. 1ST WARD, HOSPET ROAD, P.O. HARAPANAHALLI-583131 DAVANAGERE DISTRICT. 3. G. ASHOK KUMAR S/O HANUMANTHAPPA AGED ABOUT 48 YEARS R/AT. HALAVAGALU P.O. HARAPANAHALLI-583131 DAVANAGERE DISTRICT.
Legal Reasoning
4. SMT. T. LEELA W/O VISHWANATH - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC:19430-DB CCC No.912/2022 C/W CCC NO.913/2022 …COMPLAINANTS HC-KAR AGED ABOUT 38 YEARS R/AT RAHMATH NAGAR P.O. HARAPANAHALLI-583131 DAVANAGERE DISTRICT. (BY SRI. M. SUDHAKAR PAI, ADV.,) AND: SMT. DIVYA .R SECRETARY THE COMMON CADRE COMMITTEE FOR THE EMPLOYEES OF PRIMARY CO-OPERATIVE AGRICULTURAL AND RURAL DEVELOPMENT BANKS KARNATAKA STATE ALUR VENKAT RAO ROAD CHAMARAJPET, BEGALURU-560018. …ACCUSED (BY SRI. M.R. RAJAGOPAL, SR. ADV., FOR SRI. P. ANAND, ADV.,) THIS CCC IS FILED UNDER SECTIONS 11 AND 12 OF THE CONTEMPT OF COURTS ACT, PRAYING TO INITIATE CONTEMPT PROCEEDINGS AGAINST THE ACCUSED HEREIN AND PUNISH HER FOR HER DELIBERATE DISOBEDIENCE TO THE FINAL ORDER OF THIS HONBLE COURT DATED 21.2.2022 IN WP NO.13915/2018(S-REG) (VIDE ANNEXURE-A HEREIN) IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY. IN CIVIL CONTEMPT PETITION NO.913/2022 BETWEEN: 1 . MRS. S. SUNITHA W/O R. SUNDARAMURTHY AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS R/AT NO.C/96, "C" BLOCK SWAMY VIVEKANADA EXTENSION P.O. GOPALA - 577 201 - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC:19430-DB CCC No.912/2022 C/W CCC NO.913/2022 HC-KAR SHIVAMOGGA TALUK AND DISTRICT. 2 . K.N. JAYADEVAPPA S/O NANJUNDAIAH AGED ABOUT 41 YEARS R/AT KOPPA P.O.GORAGONDANAHALLI-572201 TIPTUR TALUK, TUMKUR DISTRICT. 3 . G.S. GAYATHRI W/O M.N. NIRANJANAMURTHY AGED ABOUT 49 YEARS R/AT P.O. GORAGONDANAHLLI-572201 TIPTUR TALUK, TUMKUR DISTRICT. 4 . NIRANJAN S/O RAMAPPA AGED ABOUT 43 YEARS R/AT KAMMIGALA STREET RAGHAVENDRA EXTENSION P.O. N.R. PURA-577134 CHIKMAGALUR DISTRICT. 5 . PRAVEEN K.H. S/O HIRIYANNA AGED ABOUT 39 YEARS R/AT KOTARIKOPPA, P.O KIGGA-577129 SRINGERI TALUK CHIKAMAGALURU DISTRICT. 6 . NAGAVENI H.N. W/O SATISH A.D. AGED ABOUT 37 YEARS R/AT ANANDUR, BALEHALLI P.O. HOSAGADDE-577411 SHIMOGA DISTRICT. 7 . ROHINI M.K. W/O ARUNACHALA G.N. AGED ABOUT 37 YEARS R/AT GUDDEKOPPA - 4 - NC: 2025:KHC:19430-DB CCC No.912/2022 C/W CCC NO.913/2022 HC-KAR P.O. R.S. PURA-577139 SHIMOGA DISTRICT. 8 . MALLANAGOUDA C. HIREGOUDAR S/O CHENNAPPAGOUDA AGED ABOUT 49 YEARS R/AT P.O. BYAHATTI-580023 HUBLI TALUK, DHARWAD DISTRICT. 9 . KALLAPPA Y. SATYAMMANAVAR S/O YELLAPPA AGED ABOUT 49 YEARS R/AT P.O. KOLIWAD-580023 HUBLI TALUK, DHARWAD DISTRICT. 10 . ASHOKA Y. BAKALE S/O YELLUSA AGED ABOUT 35 YEARS R/AT PETABANE P.O. LAKSHMESHWAR-582116 GADAG DISTRICT. 11 . H.S. NAGANAGOUDA S/O H. SHIVAVASANAGOUDA AGED ABOUT 57 YEARS R/AT BAGEVADI BASAVESHWAR NILAYA 19TH WARD, SADASHIVANAGAR P.O. SIRUGUPPA-583121 BELLARY DISTRICT. 12 . H. MALLIKARJUNAGOUDA S/O P. MUDUKANAGOUDA AGED ABOUT 47 YEARS R/AT MAILAPUR VILLAGE P.O. BALAKUKNDI-583121 SIRAGUPPA TALUK, BELLARY DISTRICT. 13 . NIJAGUNA M S/O M. NAMBENNA AGED ABOUT 51 YEARS R/AT LIG-81, K.H.B.COLONY - 5 - NC: 2025:KHC:19430-DB CCC No.912/2022 C/W CCC NO.913/2022 HC-KAR 13TH WARD, SIRUGUPPA-583121 BELLARY DISTRICT. 14 . DESAIGOUDA S/O NINGANAGOUDA POLICE PATIL AGED ABOUT 42 YEARS GONDBAL, P.O. KOPPAL-583228. 15 . S. GIRISH S/O A.T. SHANKARAPPA GOWDRU AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS R/AT BENKIKERE VILLAGE P.O. HODIGERE-577213 CHANNAGIRI TALUK DAVANAGERE DISTRICT. 16 . SHANKARA .B S/O BORAIAH AGED ABOUT 51 YEARS R/AT DOOR NO.392, NEW KUKRUBA STREET T. NARASIPURA-571124, MYSURU DISTRICT. 17 . B.S. MANJULA W/O B. SUDHAKUMAR AGED ABOUT 47 YEARS R/AT OPP. CHOWDESHWARI KALYANA MANTAP P.O. HIREBIDANOOR 561208 CHIKKABALLAPUR DISTRICT. 18 . R. DHARMINI W/O Y.R. BABU AGED ABOUT 44 YEARS STAFF BAGEPALLI TALUK PRIMARY CO-OPERATIVE AGRICULTURAL AND RURAL DEVELOPMENT BANK LTD., P.O. BAGEPALLI CHIKKABALLAPUR DISTRICT. 19 . VINAYA KUMAR .K S/O LATE DEVAPPA ACHARYA AGED ABOUT 46 YEARS - 6 - NC: 2025:KHC:19430-DB CCC No.912/2022 C/W CCC NO.913/2022 HC-KAR R/AT SAMETHADKA HOUSE DARBE POST, PUTTUR-574202, D.K. 20 . SURESH .P S/O LATE NARAYANA NAIK AGED ABOUT 52 YEARS R/AT JANATHA HOUSE MANJALPODPU, NEHRU NAGAR P.O. PUTTUR-574202 (D.K). 21 . BHARATH .T S/O VISHWANATH GOWDA AGED ABOUT 38 YEARS R/AT TENKILA, P.O. PUTTUR-574202 (D.K). 22 . DINESH M.S. S/O M.D. SUBBANNA GOWDA AGED ABOUT 46 YEARS R/AT KODTHALKAJE HOUSE GUTHIGAR VILLAGE P.O. GUTHIGAR-574218 SULLIA TALUK (DK). 23 . B. DAYANANDA S/O VENKATESH SAPALYA AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS R/AT VENKATESH KRIPA MUDANADUGODU VILLAGE P.O. BANTWAL-574211 (DK). 24 . GANESHA S/O KRISHNAPPA DEVADIGA AGED ABOUT 43 YEARS R/AT KEREMANE HOUSE 10-THOKUR VILLAGE AND POST VIA HALEYANGADI MANGALURU TALUK (DK). (BY SRI. M. SUDHAKAR PAI, ADV.,) ..COMPLAINANTS - 7 - NC: 2025:KHC:19430-DB CCC No.912/2022 C/W CCC NO.913/2022 HC-KAR AND SMT. DIVYA .R SECRETARY THE COMMON CADRE COMMITTEE FOR THE EMPLOYEES OF PRIMARY CO-OPERATIVE AGRICULTURAL AND RURAL DEVELOPMENT BANKS KARNATAKA STATE ALUR VENKATA RAO ROAD CHAMARAJPET, BENGALURU - 560018. (BY SRI. M.R. RAJAGOPAL, SR. ADV., FOR SRI. P. ANAND, ADV., ) …ACCUSED THIS CCC IS FILED UNDER SECTIONS 11 AND 12 OF THE CONTEMPT OF COURTS ACT, PRAYING TO INITIATE CONTEMPT PROCEEDINGS AGAINST THE ACCUSED HEREIN AND PUNISH HER FOR HER DELIBERATE DISOBEDIENCE TO THE FINAL ORDER OF THIS HONBLE COURT DATED 16.2.2022 IN WP NO.56200/2017 (S-REG) (VIDE ANNEXURE-A HEREIN) IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY. THESE PETITIONS, COMING ON FOR HEAR BEFORE CHARGE, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MRS. K.S.MUDAGAL and HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIJAYKUMAR A. PATIL - 8 - NC: 2025:KHC:19430-DB CCC No.912/2022 C/W CCC NO.913/2022 HC-KAR ORAL ORDER (PER: HON'BLE MRS. K.S.MUDAGAL) Since common question of law and facts are involved in these two matters, the same are taken up together for consideration. 2. These complaints are filed alleging that respondent- has committed wilful disobedience of the judgment of the learned Single Judge of this Court passed in W.P.No.13915/2018 and W.P.No.56200/2017 (S-REG) on 21.02.2022 and 16.02.2022 respectively. Complainants had filed those petitions seeking writ of mandamus against respondent No.1 therein to regularize the services of present complainants/petitioners, to extend regular pay-scales and consequential benefits arising therefrom. Learned Single Judge in both the cases, on hearing the parties, passed the order directing respondent No.1 to consider the matter in accordance with the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Secretary to the State of Karnataka and others vs. Umadevi reported in (2006) 4 SCC 1, Sheo Narain Nagar and others vs. State of Uttar Pradesh and another reported in (2018) 13 SCC 432 and the order of this Court in W.P.No.1338/1998. - 9 - NC: 2025:KHC:19430-DB CCC No.912/2022 C/W CCC NO.913/2022 HC-KAR Paragraph No.10 in both the orders is common which is relevant for the purpose of these cases and that reads as follows: "10. Even a Co-ordinate Bench of this Court in W.P.No.1338/1998 disposed of on 12.11.1998 has directed the Common Cadre Committee to regularize the services of the petitioners who were similarly placed. Since the case of the petitioners has not been considered by the first respondent it is suffice for this Court to direct the first respondent, to consider for of regularization, keeping in view the law laid down by the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of UMADEVI (supra) and SHEO NARAIN NAGAR (supra) and the order passed by a Co-ordinate Bench of this Court in W.P.No.1338/1998 and connected matters, within six months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order." the petitioners case the 3. Thereafter, on considering the representations of the complainants, respondent No.1 has issued endorsement dated 26.08.2022 which is marked at Annexure-C in both the cases by the complainants. The substance of the said endorsement is that as per the judgment of Hon'ble Supreme Court in Umadevi's case referred to supra, the complainants ought to have satisfied the following factors: i. ii. The recruitment should not be illegal; Appointment should be against the sanctioned posts; - 10 - NC: 2025:KHC:19430-DB CCC No.912/2022 C/W CCC NO.913/2022 HC-KAR iii. Appointee should have required qualification for the said post; and iv. The services should not have been continued on the basis of any interim order of the Court. 4. The applications of the complainants are rejected on the ground that once the Common Cadre Committee is constituted under Section 128A of Karnataka Co-operative Societies Act, 1959, only the said Committee has the power for appointment, transfer and disciplinary action and other service conditions of the employees. But the appointment in these cases was made by the Banks after constitution of the Committee. Therefore, the said appointment was illegal. 5. Sri.M.Sudhakar Pai, learned counsel for the complainants submits that there is a positive direction to consider the representations in the light of the judgment of this Court in W.P.No.1338/1998 and other connected matters, where in similar cases, the services of similarly appointed employees are regularized. 6. Whereas, Sri.M.R.Rajagopal, learned senior counsel appearing for the advocate on record for accused submits that learned Single Judge has directed to consider the - 11 - NC: 2025:KHC:19430-DB CCC No.912/2022 C/W CCC NO.913/2022 HC-KAR representations not only in accordance with the judgment in W.P.No.1338/1998 and connected matters but also in accordance with the judgment in the cases of Umadevi and Sheo Narain Nagar referred to supra. As the complainants' representations were not covered under Umadevi's case, the same are rejected. If rejection is not in accordance with the said judgment, the complainants' remedy is to challenge those endorsements. 7. Whereas, learned counsel for the complainants relying on the documents produced at Document Nos.1 to 3 with his memo dated 18.07.2024, contends that similar endorsement issued in case of one Venkatesh, a similarly situated person, was questioned before this Court in W.P.No.20497/2005 and there also similar direction was issued and respondent No.1, under the order dated 31.05.2008, has regularised the services of said Venkatesh and other two employees though they were appointed subsequent to 1992. 8. Whereas, Sri.M.R.Rajgopal, learned Senior counsel submits that the said question is clarified by reply of the - 12 - NC: 2025:KHC:19430-DB CCC No.912/2022 C/W CCC NO.913/2022 HC-KAR accused dated 12.03.2025 whereunder they have stated that appointment of Venkatesh was prior to 1992. 9. In the endorsement, the accused has stated that it has considered the representations in accordance with the judgment in the cases of Umadevi, Sheo Narain Nagar referred to supra and W.P.No.1338/1998. The complainants contend that the same is not in accordance with those judgments and their recruitment was subsequent to 1992, etc. That is the matter of evidence and interpretation of judgments. Such probe is not within the scope of contempt proceedings. In such case, the complainants have to question the said endorsement before the appropriate forum. Therefore, the complaints are dropped, reserving liberty to the complainants to seek appropriate remedy. Sd/- (K.S.MUDAGAL) JUDGE Sd/- (VIJAYKUMAR A. PATIL) JUDGE BSR List No.: 1 Sl No.: 34