Contempt Petition No. 1155 of 2023 · The High Court
Case Details
- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC:10991-DB CCC No. 1155 of 2023 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 17TH DAY OF MARCH, 2025 PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE K.SOMASHEKAR AND THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE VENKATESH NAIK T CIVIL CONTEMPT PETITION NO. 1155 OF 2023 BETWEEN: SRI. S. KRISHNA MURTHY S/O. SANJEEVAIAH AGED ABOUT 54 YEARS R/AT. KODIGETHIRUMALAPURA HESARAGHATTA TB POST BENGALURU - 560 089. (BY SMT. ANITHA S M, ADVOCATE FOR SRI. RAVI SHANKAR K, ADVOCATE) AND: …COMPLAINANT Digitally signed by MOUNESHWARAPPA NAGARATHNA Location: High Court of Karnataka 1. SRI. SUNIL BARATHWAL THE SECRETARY MINISTRY OF COMMERCE AND INDUSTRIES, DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE FT (ST) SECTION UDYOG BHAVAN, NEW DELHI - 110 007. 2. SRI. JAGADISH IAS, THE SECRETARY, COFFEE BOARD, DR. AMBEDKAR VEEDHI, BENGALURU – 560 001. (BY SMT. ANUPAMA HEGDE, CGSC FOR A1; SMT. ANUPARNA BARDOLAI, ADVOCATE FOR R2) …ACCUSED THIS CCC IS FILED UNDER SECTIONS 11 AND 12 OF THE CONTEMPT OF COURTS ACT, PRAYING TO INITIATE CONTEMPT PROCEEDINGS AGAINST THE ACCUSED FOR WILLFUL VIOLATION AND DISOBEDIENCE OF THE COURT ORDER DATED 20.07.2023 PASSED BY THIS HON’BLE COURT IN W.P.NO.7120/2020 (S-RES) AND PUNISH THE ACCUSED IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW. - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC:10991-DB CCC No. 1155 of 2023 THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE K.SOMASHEKAR and HON'BLE MR JUSTICE VENKATESH NAIK T ORAL ORDER (PER: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE K.SOMASHEKAR) 1. Heard
Legal Reasoning
learned counsel Sri Ravi Shankar K., for complainant is on record, but represented by learned counsel Smt. Anitha S.M. Similarly, Smt. Anupama Hegde, learned Central Government Standing Counsel for accused No.1 and learned counsel Smt. Anuparna Bordoloi for accused No.2 are on record. 2. This contempt petition is initiated by the complainant for compliance of the order passed by the learned Single Judge on writ side in Writ Petition No.7120/2020 (S-Res) dated 20.07.2023. 3. Whereas learned counsel Smt. Anuparna Bordoloi for accused No.2 in this matter submits that accused No.2 is only a
Decision
formal party in the writ petition and there is no role for accused No.2 and no relief has been sought against accused No.2 in this contempt proceedings. - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC:10991-DB CCC No. 1155 of 2023 4. Smt. Anupama Hegde, learned Central Government Standing Counsel for accused No.1, pressed into service for consideration the reply affidavit of the accused No.1 / respondent No.1 namely Sri Rajender Singh, Under Secretary, Ministry of Commerce and Industry, Department of Commerce, Udyog Bhawan, New Delhi and whereas in para No.2, he has specifically stated that he is the Under Secretary to the Government of India, and he knows the facts of the present case as in between the complainant and the respondent. He submits that Shri S. Krishna Murthy was an employee of STCL Limited (Formerly Spices Trading Corporation Limited), a subsidiary of State Trading Corporation of India Limited (STC). He was working as a Junior Sales Officer at the Branch of STCL Limited in Bangalore. The Voluntary Separation Scheme (VSS) was introduced by STCL Limited on 05.09.2013, pursuant to the winding up of the Company by the Government. The complainant opted for VSS on 04.12.2013, which was accepted by the Management on 03.01.2014, pursuant to which the complainant was relieved from services with effect from 24.01.2014 and was given the VSS ex-gratia benefits. - 4 - NC: 2025:KHC:10991-DB CCC No. 1155 of 2023 5. Therefore, it is deemed appropriate to refer the provision under Section 2(b) of the Contempt of Courts Act and more so, keeping in view the reply affidavit dated 06.03.2024, in detail, along with Annexures-R1 to R5, which has been filed by accused No.1 to persuade this matter in accordance with law. Paragraph Nos.4 to 11 of the reply affidavit read thus: “4. I respectfully submit that the Complainant, Shri S. Krishna Murthy was an employee of STCL Limited (Formerly Spices Trading Corporation Limited), a subsidiary of State Trading Corporation of India Limited (STC). He was working as Junior Sales Officer at the Branch of STCL Limited in Bangalore. The Voluntary Separation Scheme (VSS) was introduced by STCL Ltd on 05/09/2013, pursuant to the winding up of the company by the Government. The Complainant opted for VSS on 04/12/2013, which was accepted by the Management on 03/01/2014, pursuant to which the Complainant was relieved from services with effect from 24/01/2014 and was given the VSS ex- gratia benefits. 5. It is respectfully submitted that the Complainant alongwith other ex-employees of STCL Limited had approached National Commission for Scheduled Castes (NCSC) in 2014 and NCSC in its communication dated 26/02/2014 had recommended to consider the absorption of the employees of STCL Ltd in STC or any other - 5 - NC: 2025:KHC:10991-DB CCC No. 1155 of 2023 Government Public Sector undertakings (PSUs), so that the interest of the underprivileged group of the society could be protected. 6. Further, it is submitted that Union of India, Department of Commerce (DOC) vide letter dated 24/02/2014 had circulated the details of 31 ex- employees of STCL Ltd (including the name of the Complainant) to various organisations under DoC (4 Commodity Boards alongwith Tobacco Board and Marine Products Export Development Authority), recommending their absorption in such organisations with an advisory to absorb/accommodate them as and where suitable and if they fulfil the requirement of the post. 7. It is submitted that in response to the above- said circulation, the Coffee Board absorbed 10 employees, which included Smt. Lata Srinivas (one of the 3 employees, who approached the NCSC). Though the details of all the 3 employees who had approached the NCSC were provided to Coffee Board, the other 2 employees viz. Shri S. Krishna Murthy, the Complainant herein and Smt. H. Gangamma were not considered by the Coffee Board as they were not meeting the selection criteria laid down by the Coffee Board. The minimum qualification for the post of Junior Assistant and Multi-Tasking Staff (MTS) was XII/PUC and X or ITI or equivalent respectively. In both cases, the age of the candidate was to be below 40 years on the date of the application. The Complainant (for the post of Junior Assistant) was - 6 - NC: 2025:KHC:10991-DB CCC No. 1155 of 2023 not fulfilling the age-criteria as he was above 40 years and Smt. Gangamma (for the post of MTS) was not fulfilling either age or qualification criteria. Thereafter, on 04/01/2016, the reply to NSCS was also sent in this regard. The Department of Commerce has also followed up vide its letter dated 21/01/2016 with respect to the absorption of remaining ex-employees of STCL Ltd with various organisations. 8. It is humbly submitted that the Complainant on an earlier occasion approached this Hon'ble Court in W.P.No.33257/2016 seeking to issue a writ of Mandamus to absorb the petitioner in any of the Department under M/o Commerce & Industry or any Boards governed by the Govt. This Hon'ble Court by order dated 15/09/2018 directed the DoC consider his representation. Pursuant to this order, the Department of commerce on 27/12/2018 had circulated a note to all CPSEs and Boards requesting the absorption of the Complainant and the same was informed to the Complainant also. The Complainant had filed a contempt petition in CCC No.1033/2019 before this Hon'ble Court alleging the non-compliance of the order dated 15/09/2018 passed in W.P. 33257/2016. This Hon'ble Court by its order dated 17/07/2019 has been pleased to dismiss the contempt petition by making observation that there is no disobedience of the order of the learned Single Judge. True copy of the order dated - 7 - NC: 2025:KHC:10991-DB CCC No. 1155 of 2023 17/07/2019 is produced herewith at ANNEXURE- R1 for the kind perusal of this Hon'ble Court. 9. It is further submitted that the Department of Commerce once again on 09/09/2019 circulated a letter to CPSES and Boards requesting for absorption of the Complainant. True copy of the circular dated 09/09/2019 is produced herewith at ANNEXURE-R2 for the kind perusal of this Hon'ble Court. Thereafter, the Complainant filed a Writ Petition in W.P. No. 7120/2020 praying to issue a writ of Mandamus directing the Respondents to take appropriate action to absorb the Complainant. This Hon'ble Court by its order dated 20/07/2023 disposed off the Writ Petition reserving liberty to the Complainant to make one more representation to the Respondent No.1 therein/Department of Commerce, Ministry of Commerce & Industry within 4 weeks from the date of receipt of certified copy of the Order and upon making such representation, the Respondent No.1 therein shall consider the same within 3 months thereafter. 10. It is humbly submitted that pursuant to the Order passed by this Hon'ble Court, the Respondent Department received the representation dated nil given by Complainant and copy of same is produced herewith as ANNEXURE-R3. This Department vide letter dated 06/09/2023 requested the organisations under the Department of Commerce to consider the request of the Complainant, the same is produced herewith - 8 - NC: 2025:KHC:10991-DB CCC No. 1155 of 2023 at ANNEXURE-R4. The Complainant submitted yet another representation on 23/09/2023. This Department informed the Complainant vide its letter dated 10/10/2023 stating that request was sent to all PSUs, Boards and other organisations under the Department of Commerce to consider the request for absorption as per rules. The said communication was sent to the Complainant on the address mentioned in his representation through speed post, Indian Post. However, the same has been returned by the Indian Post mentioning that there was no such person in the address. True copy of the letter dated 10/10/2023 alongwith the remarks by the Postal Department and the track consignment is produced herewith at ANNEXURE-R5, for the kind perusal of this Hon'ble Court. 11. It is submitted that appropriate action has been taken by the Department of Commerce and the directions issued by this Hon'ble Court are complied with. The Complainant had availed VSS and the same was accepted by the STCL Limited. Since the company was approved for closure by the Union Cabinet during the year 2013, the employees were separated through VSS and there was no obligation on the part of the Government to provide any alternate employment. The acceptance of absorption request of some employees by Coffee Board was purely upto the requirement of said organisation and suitability of candidates. This Respondent Department can only - 9 - NC: 2025:KHC:10991-DB CCC No. 1155 of 2023 forward the request for absorption to organisation under its control for consideration at their end, as per their rules and regulations and it was done on number of occasions. There is no disobedience by the Secretary, Department of Commerce of this Hon'ble Court orders and he has acted well within the purview of the governing rules and regulations laid down by the Department.” 6. Therefore, the contempt proceeding does not survive for consideration to initiate action against the accused No.1. Consequently, the contempt proceedings are hereby closed. However, keeping in view the submissions made by learned counsel for the complainant in this matter, it is deemed appropriate to reserve liberty as sought for, in accordance with law. Sd/- (K.SOMASHEKAR) JUDGE Sd/- (VENKATESH NAIK T) JUDGE BSS, List No.: 1 Sl No.: 17