High Court Of Karnataka vs Sri Malleshaiah
2022 Latest Caselaw 1634 Kant

                                                 -1-




                                                           CCC No. 395 of 2014


                           IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

                             DATED THIS THE 03RD DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2022

                                              PRESENT

                                 THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE B.VEERAPPA

                                                AND

                                 THE HON'BLE MRS JUSTICE M. G. UMA

                           CIVIL CONTEMPT PETITION NO. 395 OF 2014 (CIVIL)

                      BETWEEN:

                      1.    HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA,
                            REPRESENTED BY
                            THE REGISTRAR GENERAL,
                            HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA,
                            BANGALORE-560 001.
                                                               ...COMPLAINANT
                      (BY SRI M. KRISHNAPPA, ADVOCATE)
Digitally signed by
USHA
NAGENAHALLI           AND:
SHANMUKHAPPA
Location: High
Court of              1.    SRI MALLESHAIAH,
Karnataka
                            THE THEN ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER,
                            HUSUR SUB-DIVISION,
                            HUNSUR, NOW WORKING AS
                            SPECIAL LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER,
                            NATIONAL HIGH WAYS AUTHORITY OF INDIA,
                            KUNIGAL.
                                                                     ...ACCUSED

                           THIS CCC (SUO-MOTU) IS FILED UNDER SECTIONS 11 &
                      12 OF THE CONTEMPT OF COURTS ACT BY THE COMPLAINANT
                      PRAYING TO INITIATE CIVIL CONTEMPT PROCEEDINGS
                      AGAINST THE ACCUSED - SRI MALLESHAIAH (THE THEN
                      ASSISTANT    COMMISSIONER,     HUNSUR   SUB-DIVISION,
                               -2-




                                           CCC No. 395 of 2014


HUNSUR) NOW WORKING AS SPECIAL LAND ACQUISITION
OFFICER, NATIONAL HIGHWAYS AUTHORITY OF INDIA,
KUNIGAL, TUMKUR DISTRICT FOR DISOBEDIENCE OF THE
JUDGMENT DATED 08.08.1997 PASSED IN W.A.965/1996 AND
TO PUNISH HIM IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW.

     THIS CCC COMING ON FOR ORDERS                  THIS     DAY,
B.VEERAPPA J., MADE THE FOLLOWING:

                          ORDER

This suo-motu contempt proceedings is initiated by the

Registrar General to take action against the accused - Sri

Malleshaiah, Retired Assistant Commissioner, Hunsur Sub-

Division, Hunsur under the provisions of Sections 11 and 12 of

the Contempt of Court Act read with Article 215 of the

Constitution of India on the ground that the accused has acted

in contravention of the orders, dated 22.6.2021 passed by the

learned Single Judge of this Court, while dismissing Writ

Petition No.12821/2011 and connected matters had levied cost

of Rs.25,000/- (Rupees Twenty Five Thousand) on the accused

and the judgment dated 8.8.1997 passed by a Co-ordinate

Bench of this Court in W.A.965/1996 and to punish the accused

in accordance with law.

2. It is the case of the complainant, at this stage, that

against the order dated 22.6.2021 passed in

CCC No. 395 of 2014

W.P.No.12821/2011, the accused preferred Writ Appeal

No.1621/2014 and one Doddaiah preferred Writ Appeal

No.965/1996 and both the appeals were disposed off by the

judgments dated 22.8.2014 and 8.8.1997 respectively. Against

the said judgments, the present accused preferred Special

Leave Petition (C) No.28619/2014 before the Hon'ble Supreme

Court and the Hon'ble Supreme Court disposed off the same on

13.7.2021 observing that considering the scope of further

proceedings outlined in the order dated 8.8.1997 passed by the

Division Bench, to say the least, the petitioner (accused) in his

capacity as Assistant Commissioner definitely committed an

error and in the circumstances, the observations made by the

High Court cannot be said to be unjustified. It is for the High

Court to go into the matter Whether the conduct on part of said

petitioner (accused) amounted to willful violation of the orders

passed by the High Court and, therefore, calls for initiation of

action in contempt. But insofar as the observations are

concerned, they were certainly justified.

3. In response to the notice issued in the present

contempt petition, the accused has filed compliance affidavit

CCC No. 395 of 2014

dated 10.3.2014 specifically stating at paragraphs-3, 4, 7, 8

and 9 as under:

"3. I once again submit and state that I have passed the order dated 04-04-2002 in proceedings No. LND: 28:98-99 under work pressure and I could not properly appreciate the order passed by this Hon'ble Court dated 08-08-1997 passed in Writ Appeal No. 965/1996. I had no intention to show any disrespect to the orders of this Hon'ble Court. I regret for the same and I tender un-conditional apology to this Hon'ble Court. I hereby tender my unconditional apology and the same may be accepted and I may be pardoned.

4. I state that, I was unaware of the order dated 22-06-2011 passed by this Hon'ble Court in Writ Petition No. 12821 of 2011 (KLR-RES), wherein this Hon'ble Court has directed to initiate contempt action against me stating that I have violated the order passed by this Hon'ble Court in Writ Appeal No. 965 / 1996 dated 08-08-1997. I came to know about these facts only at the time when I received a notice from the Registrar

CCC No. 395 of 2014

of this Hon'ble Court dated 19-08-2011. I have given my reply to the said notice on 29-08-2011. While replying to the said notice I came to know that I have passed the orders dated 04.04.2002 in proceedings No. LND 28: 98-99. At that point of time I could not properly go through the orders passed by this Hon'ble Court in Writ Appeal No.965/1996.

7. I further state that this mistake was crept in, due to work pressure. I have not suppressed this fact in my reply dated 29 08-2011 given to this Hon'ble Court. In the said reply I have categorically stated that due to work pressure, as I was not only discharging the duty at revenue side but also I was functioning as Chairman of Land Tribunal of K.R.Nagara Taluk and Heggada Devana Kote Taluk, Hunsur Taluk, and Periapatna Taluk. I was also functioning as Appellate Authority under Section 136 (2) of the Karnataka Land Revenue Act 1964 in respect of four taluks. Apart from this I had to implement several schemes which were envisaged by the Government of Karnataka for upliftment of SC/ST. Backward Classes, Backward Tribes and other weaker section

CCC No. 395 of 2014

of the society. I was also looking after election related matters i.e., elections to Grama Panchayaths, Taluk Panchayaths and Zilla Panchyaths. This being the fact and position the said error crept in while discharging my duty as Assistant Commissioner, Hunsur Sub-Division.

8. I state that I have passed the aforesaid order as Assistant Commissioner. Hunsur Sub-Division, dated 04-04-2002 in proceedings No. LND:28:98-99 without any disrespect to the orders passed by this Hon'ble Court and the mistake crept in was not an intentional one or for any extraneous considerations.

9. I state that as a Government Servant I have got utmost respect to this Hon'ble Court and I will not show any disrespect to the orders of this Hon'ble Court. Hence I request this Hon'ble Court to accept my un- conditional apology and drop the contempt proceedings initiated against me."

4. The accused infact had filed compliance affidavit

before this Court in the year 2014, but has proceeded to file

writ appeal as well as special leave petition before the Hon'ble

CCC No. 395 of 2014

Supreme Court. The fact remains that the Hon'ble Supreme

Court has justified the observations made by the learned Single

Judge and affirmed by the Division Bench with regard to the

violation of the Court order. The accused being the Assistant

Commissioner, should have institutional responsibility and

respect to the orders passed by this Court. When once he files

an affidavit before this Court apologizing, he would not have

proceeded further challenging the observations made by the

learned Single Judge which was affirmed by a Co-ordinate

Bench of this Court and the Hon'ble Supreme Court.

5. Today, the judiciary is the repository of public faith.

It is the trustee of the people. It is the last hope of the people.

After every knock at all the doors failed people approach the

judiciary as the last resort. It is the only temple worshipped by

every citizen of this nation, regardless of religion, caste, sex or

place of birth.

6. In the unconditional apology filed in the form of

affidavit the accused has categorically deposed that as he was

placed in-charge of four Taluks working as Chairman of Land

Tribunal in respect of K.R. Nagara Taluk, Heggada Devana Kote

CCC No. 395 of 2014

Taluk, Hunsur Taluk and Periapatna Taluk; functioning as

Appellate Authority of the Karnataka Land Revenue Act in

respect of four Taluks; to implement several schemes which

were envisaged by the Government of Karnataka; looking after

elections to Grama Panchayaths, Taluk Panchayath and Zilla

Pachayath, the said error has crept due to pressure of work

while discharging his duties.

7. Admittedly, the accused has not suppressed any fact

in the reply filed by him before this Court and he has already

retired from service. When he has come to the Court with

unconditional apology that it is purely a mistake and not

intention, his unconditional apology has to be accepted by

imposing some costs with a warning that he shall not repeat

such mistakes in future. Mere accepting the affidavit and

discharging him from contempt proceedings may give a wrong

signal to such accused persons, since the accused in the

present case, right from the inception itself, instead of

tendering apology, has taken a chance before the Division

Bench of this Court as well as the Hon'ble Supreme Court and

ultimately, when he failed to succeed before the Hon'ble

CCC No. 395 of 2014

Supreme Court, he is tendering unconditional apology in the

form of affidavit.

8. Keeping in mind that the accused has already

retired from service and has not only tendered absolute and

unconditional apology, but has also promised that he would not

repeat such mistakes in future. Considering the facts and

circumstances involved in the present case, we are of the

considered opinion that it is just and proper to impose

reasonable costs of Rs.25,000/- (Rupees Twenty Five Thousand

Only) on the accused for dragging the proceedings upto the

Hon'ble Supreme Court and wasting public judicial time for all

these years, which shall be paid to the Karnataka Legal

Services Authority within a period of two weeks from today and

discharge him by accepting the unconditional apology filed in

the form of affidavit.

9. In view of the above, we pass the following:

ORDER

Contempt Proceedings are hereby dropped subject to

the condition that the accused shall pay a sum of

Rs.25,000/- (Rupees Twenty Five Thousand only) as

- 10 -

CCC No. 395 of 2014

cost to the Karnataka State Legal Services Authority,

Bengaluru, within a period of two weeks from today,

failing which, the office is directed to post the matter

after two weeks for further orders.

Sd/-

JUDGE

Sd/-

JUDGE

Nsu/-