Karnataka High Court
M.S. Ramesh vs Mr. B.R. Ramesh on 4 November, 2024
-1-
NC: 2024:KHC:44224-DB
CCC No. 865 of 2024
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 4TH DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2024
PRESENT
THE HON'BLE MR. N. V. ANJARIA, CHIEF JUSTICE
AND
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K. V. ARAVIND
CCC NO. 865 OF 2024 (CIVIL)
BETWEEN:
1. M.S. RAMESH,
S/O. LATE SHANKARAPPA
AGED ABOUT 62 YEARS
RESIDENT OF WARD NO.23,
KODIMANCHENAHALLI, DEVANAHALLI
TOWN - 582 110.
BENGALURU RURAL DISTRICT.
...COMPLAINANT
(BY SRI RAVINDRA GAJANAN KOLLE, ADVOCATE)
Digitally signed AND:
by VALLI
MARIMUTHU
Location: High
Court of
Karnataka 1. MR. B.R. RAMESH,
MAJOR
THE DEPUTY CONSERVATOR OF FOREST,
CHIKKABALLAPURA FOREST DIVISION,
CHIKKABALLALPURA - 562 101.
2. MR. H. V. MANJUNATH
THE RANGE FOREST OFFICER,
-2-
NC: 2024:KHC:44224-DB
CCC No. 865 of 2024
CHIKKABALLAPURA RANGE FOREST OFFICE,
CHIKKABALLALPURA - 562 101.
3. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA
REP. BY ITS CHIEF SECRETARY,
VIDHANA SOUDHA, BENGALURU - 560 001.
...ACCUSED
(BY SRI K.S. HARISH, G.A.)
THIS CCC IS FILED UNDER SECTIONS 11 AND 12 OF THE
CONTEMPT OF COURTS ACT, 1971, R/W ARTICLE 215 OF THE
CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, BY THE COMPLAINANT, WHEREIN
PRAYS THAT THE HON'BLE COURT MAY BE PLEASED TO INITIATE
CONTEMPT OF COURT PROCEEDINGS AND PUNISH THE
ACCUSED NO.1 AND 2 FOR WILLFULLY AND DELIBERATELY
DISOBEYING THE DIRECTIONS OF THIS HON'BLE COURT VIDE ITS
JUDGMENT AND ORDER DATED 01.02.2024 IN WP NO.8707/2023
(GM-MMS) PRODUCED AT ANNEXURE-A.
THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY,
ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:
CORAM: HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR. JUSTICE
N. V. ANJARIA
and
HON'BLE MR JUSTICE K. V. ARAVIND
-3-
NC: 2024:KHC:44224-DB
CCC No. 865 of 2024
ORAL JUDGMENT
(PER: HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE
MR. JUSTICE N. V. ANJARIA)
This Court, while disposing of the writ petition as per the
order dated 01.02.2024, set aside the order dated 20.09.2022
passed by respondent No.2-the Secretary, Department of
Commerce and Industries. It was further directed to consider the
request of the petitioner for excluding the overlapping area
mentioned in the map within the stipulated time.
2. By filing the present contempt petition, the complainant has
complained of non-compliance of the above directions.
3. In response to the notice issued in the contempt petition, the
Deputy Conservator of Forests, Chikkaballapura Forest Division,
Chikkaballapura, filed the compliance affidavit.
3.1 In the compliance affidavit, the following facts and aspects
are stated,
(i) Pursuant to the directions issued in the writ petition as
above, the request of the complainant was considered
and the measurement of forest area was done.
NC: 2024:KHC:44224-DB
(ii) The Tahsildar of the taluka, without notice of the
respondent-authorities, reduced the area held by them
since the RTC in Sy.No.5 of Gumlapura village stood
to the extent of 12.35 Acres, was reduced to 9.31
Acres.
(iii) The forest area was reduced without following the
procedure and therefore, the appeal was preferred
before the Assistant Commissioner which was
registered as Regular Appeal (Chikka) No.298 of
2024-25 at the instance of the complainant-petitioner.
3.2 Serious dispute of the fact exists with regard to the forest
area and the revenue area which may be available with regard to
identification of the area in Sy. No.5 of Gumlapura village.
3.3 It is stated in the compliance affidavit that the request of the
complainant could not be considered in view of the dispute with
regard to identification of the area. The complainant has to get the
actual area of the land identified by way of proper survey, phodi
and durasthi, it was stated.
4. The authorities have thus discharged their duty towards
compliance of the order.
NC: 2024:KHC:44224-DB
5. In view of what is stated in the compliance affidavit, it could
not be said that there is any wilful non-compliance of the directions
on the part of the respondent-authorities.
6. The contempt proceedings are not maintainable in view of
the aforesaid facts and the action taken.
7. The contempt petition is dismissed with closure of the
proceedings.
In view of dismissal of the petition, the interlocutory
application would not survive and it stands accordingly disposed of.
Sd/-
(N. V. ANJARIA)
CHIEF JUSTICE
Sd/-
(K. V. ARAVIND)
JUDGE
DDU
