SHRI. AJIT K. BHADRAKALI v. SHRI. ASHOK DUDAGUNTI

SHRI. AJIT K. BHADRAKALI AGE. 27 YEAR, OCC. BUSINESS, R/O. PLOT NO.780, AUTO NAGAR, BELAGAVI-590015, TQ.DIST. BELAGAVI. (BY SMT. SUNANDA P. PATIL, ADVOCATE) AND:

SHRI. ASHOK DUDAGUNTI COMMISSIONER, CITY CORPORATION OF BELAGAVI, SUBHASH NAGAR, BELAGAVI-590001, TQ & DIST. BELAGAVI.

STATE OF KARNATAKA, A.G. OFFICE, DHARWAD. …COMPLAINANT JAGADISH T R Digitally signed by JAGADISH T R 14:30:15 +0530 …PROFORMA RESPONDENT …ACCUSED (BY SRI. CHETAN MUNNOLI, ADVOCATE FOR A1, SRI. G.K. HIREGOUDAR, AGA FOR PROFORMA RESPONDENT) THIS CCC IS FILED UNDER SECTION 11 AND 12 OF THE CONTEMPT OF COURTS ACT, 1971, R/W. ARTICLE 215 OF CONSTITUTION OF INDIA,1950, PLEASED TO, INITIATE CONTEMPT PROCEEDINGS AGAINST THE ACCUSED PERSON FOR HAVING COMMITTED CONTEMPT BY NOT COMPLYING THE ORDER DATED 22.09.2022 PASSED BY THIS HON’BLE COURT IN WP 102603/2022 PRODUCED AT ANNEXURE-D AND THE ACCUSED MAY BE DIRECTED TO HAND OVER THE POSSESSION OF SHOP NO.12 SITUATE AT MAHATMAFULE VEGETABLE MARKET, BELAGAVI FORTHWITH AND PUNISH THE ACCUSED IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY. - 2 - NC: 2024:KHC-D:351-DB CCC No. 100330 of 2023 THIS CONTEMPT PETITION COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, S G PANDIT J., PASSED THE FOLLOWING: ORDER This contempt petition is filed complaining disobedience of order dated 22.09.2022 passed in WP No.102603/2022. This Court by order dated 22.09.2022 passed following order: Respondent is directed to consider Annexures-C, D and E and pass an appropriate order in accordance with law within a period of one month from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

2. This Court directed the respondent/City Corporation of Belagavi to consider Annexures-C, D and E to the writ petition and pass appropriate orders in accordance with law.

Learned counsel for the complainant would submit that the complainant in the representation had sought for handing over the possession of Shop Nos.7, 9 and 12 by considering their representations. It is submitted that the respondent/Corporation has not handed over the possession of Shop Nos.7, 9 and 12 and under endorsement dated

23.11.2023, rejected the representations of the petitioners. - 3 - NC: 2024:KHC-D:351-DB CCC No. 100330 of 2023 Thus, learned counsel would submit that there is gross disobedience of the order passed by this Court.

Per contra, learned counsel Sri. Chetan Munnoli, for the accused/Corporation would submit that the only direction issued by this Court was to consider representations of the petitioner and pass appropriate order in accordance with law. It is submitted that by considering the representations of the complainants, respondent/Corporation issued endorsement dated 23.11.2023. Further, learned counsel submits that in respect of Shop No.12, one more writ petition filed by Sri. Sadanand Parashuram Haval in WP No.105814/2023 and this Court disposed off the said writ petition with an observation that respondent/Corporation shall not take any coercive steps for a period of six months in respect of Shop No.12. Learned counsel would also point out that subsequently allotment made in favour of the complainant cancelled under Communication dated 16.12.2023 (Document No.6). Thus, he submits that order passed by this Court is strictly complied and there is no disobedience. Hence, he prays for dismissal of the contempt petition. - 4 - NC: 2024:KHC-D:351-DB CCC No. 100330 of 2023

Having heard the learned counsel for the parties and on perusal of the contempt petition papers, we are of the considered view that since there is substantial compliance of the order under complaint, there is no disobedience.

This Court, as stated above, directed respondent/Corporation to consider the representations at Annexures-C, D and E to the writ petition and pass appropriate orders in accordance with law. Respondent/Corporation has considered the representations of the petitioners/complainants and issued an endorsement dated 23.11.2023. In the endorsement, respondent also stated with regard to the order passed in WP No.105814/2023, wherein this Court directed the respondent/Corporation not to take coercive steps for a period of six months in respect of existing tenant of shop No.12. Moreover, subsequently, allotment made in favour of the complainant is cancelled by Communication dated 16.12.2023. It is open for the complainant to challenge the endorsement dated 23.11.2023 as well as cancellation communication dated

16.12.2023, if so advised. As we are of the opinion that there is substantial compliance of the order under complaint, the proceedings needs to be closed. - 5 - NC: 2024:KHC-D:351-DB CCC No. 100330 of 2023

With the above, further proceedings are dropped. Sd/- JUDGE Sd/- JUDGE JTR LIST NO.: 1 SL NO.: 35