Sri K Chandrashekar Reddy vs State Of Karnataka
2022 Latest Caselaw 753 Kant

                             1


       IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

          DATED THIS THE 17TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2022

                          PRESENT

            THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE G.NARENDAR

                            AND

     THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SHIVASHANKAR AMARANNAVAR

            WRIT PETITION NO.17341/2021 (S-KSAT)

BETWEEN:

SRI. K.CHANDRASHEKAR REDDY,
SON OF SRI. THIPPA REDDY,
AGED ABOUT 65 YEARS,
RESIDING AT
DODDASIDDAVANAHALLI VILLAGE,
CHITRADURGA TALUK-577524
CHITRADURGA DISTRICT,
KARNATAKA STATE

PRESENTLY RESIDING AT:

FLAT NO.A-204, ELEGANT EMBASSY,
NEAR HDFC SCHOOL,
SHIVANAHALLI, JAKKUR ROAD,
YELAHANKA, BENGALURU.
P.C.NO.560064.
                                             ... PETITIONER
(BY SRI VENKATESH C.SHARMA, ADV.)

AND:

STATE OF KARNATAKA,
THROUGH ADDL. CHIEF SECRETARY,
ENERGY DEPARTMENT,

1.     SRI. P.RAVI KUMAR, IAS.,
       THEN, ADDL. CHIEF SECRETARY TO
                             2


     GOVERNMENT OF KARNATAKA,
     ENERGY DEPARTMENT,
     WORKED AS
     ADDL. CHIEF SECRETARY TO
     CHIEF MINISTER OF KARNATAKA,
     C.M.SECRETARIAT,
     PRESENTLY WORKING AS
     CHIEF SECRETARY TO
     GOVERNMENT OF KARNATAKA,
     VIDHANA SOUDHA, BENGALURU-560001.

2.   SRI. S.R.NARESH,
     ACCOUNTANT GENERAL (A & E)
     OFFICE OF ACCOUNTANT GENERAL,
     GOVERNMENT OF KARNATAKA,
     BENGALURU-560001.

3.   SRI. D.H.BASAVARAJ,
     CHIEF ELECTRICAL INSPECTOR,
     OFFICE OF
     CHIEF ELECTRICAL INSPECTOR,
     SECOND FLOOR,
     NIRMANA BHAVANA,
     OPP. ORION MALL,DR. RAJ KUMAR ROAD,
     RAJAJI NAGAR, BENGALURU-560010.
                                        ... RESPONDENTS
(BY SMT. SHILPA S.GOGI, HCGP.)

     THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND
227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE
IMPUGNED FINAL JUDGMENT OR ORDER DATED 20TH OCTOBER,
2020 PASSED BY HON'BLE KARNATAKA ADMINISTRATIVE
TRIBUNAL, BENGALURU IN CTA NO.28 OF 2019 C/W CTA NO.185
OF 2020, ANNEXURE-L ETC.

     THIS WRIT PETITION COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY
HEARING THIS DAY, G.NARENDAR J, MADE THE FOLLOWING:

                        ORDER

Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the

learned HCGP for the respondents.

2. This petition is filed seeking to quash the order

dated 20.10.2020 passed by the Karnataka Administrative

Tribunal, Bengaluru in CTA No.28/2019 C/w CTA

No.185/2020.

3. The Tribunal has reasoned in paragraph No.5 as

under:-

            "We     have       perused          the     records
     produced      by    learned         Counsel       for   the
     complainant         and         learned          Additional

Government Advocate. It is observed that based on the orders of this Tribunal dated 25.09.2018 made in A.No.1406/2017 the accused has settled all the retrial benefits, except the commuted value of the pension. It is a fact that commuted value of the pension could not have been computed without arriving at the quantum of pension that is liable to be paid to the complainant and as on the date of the order, pension of the complainant/applicant was the subject matter of dispute in A.No.2620/2018. So far as the direction of this Tribunal in A.No.2620/2018 dated 09.09.2019 is

concerned, the Respondents/Accused have preferred to exercise the legal right of appeal by filing Writ Petition No.9449/2020 on 23.06.2020 and the same is pending before the Hon'ble High Court. Hence, we hold that there has been no deliberate disobedience of the orders of this Tribunal, by the accused and therefore we hold that there is no prima facie case made out for initiating contempt proceedings against the accused."

4. On perusal of the above, we find no irregularity.

The contempt proceedings initiated by the petitioner before

the Tribunal have been closed on the short ground that

aggrieved by the order of the Tribunal, the State has

approached this Court in W.P.No.9449/2020, which is

pending before this Court. In that view of the matter, we

are of the considered opinion that the instant petition

questioning the rejection of the contempt petition, in view

of the pendency of the writ petition, does not warrant

interference in our hands.

5. Be that as it may, it is always open for the

petitioner to file a contempt petition once the writ petition

attains finality or after the orders of the Karnataka

Administrative Tribunal are affirmed by this Court.

6. In that view of the matter, the writ petition is

disposed of by reserving liberty to the petitioner to file a

contempt petition after the disposal of the writ petition i.e.,

W.P.No.9449/2020. The petition is ordered accordingly.

No costs.

Sd/-

JUDGE

Sd/-

JUDGE

dn/-

CT-HR