Karnataka High Court
B K Srinivasa vs Sri Dr B K Ravi on 8 July, 2020
Author: Aravind Kumar
Bench: Aravind Kumar
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 08TH DAY OF JULY 2020
PRESENT
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ARAVIND KUMAR
AND
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE E.S.INDIRESH
C.C.C. NO.215 OF 2020
Between:
B K Srinivasa
Aged about 60 years
S/o late B.R. Krishna Murthy Rao
Working as Technical Assistant
Department of Mathematics
Central College Campus
Bangalore University
Bangalore - 560 001
... Complainant
(by Shri Ranganatha S. Jois, Advocate)
And:
Sri Dr. B.K. Ravi
Registrar
Bangalore University
Gnanabharathi Campus
Bangalore - 560 056
... Accused
(by Shri D. Aswathappa, Advocate)
This CCC is filed under Section 11 and 12 of the
Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 read with Article 215 of the
Constitution of India, praying to initiate appropriate contempt
court proceedings against the accused for the willful
2
disobedience and contempt of the order dated 19.12.2019
made in WP No.9582 of 2019 vide Annexure-A.
This CCC coming on for Preliminary Hearing, this day,
ARAVIND KUMAR J, made the following:
ORDER
Heard. These contempt proceedings have been initiated by the petitioner in Writ Petition No.9582 of 2019, alleging that respondent has willfully disobeyed the direction/order dated 19th December, 2019 passed in the said writ petition. Direction issued by the learned single Judge on 19th December, 2019 in Writ Petition No.9582 of 2019 reads:
"In identical matters, learned counsel for the petitioner submits, the interim order has been granted and he places on record a copy of one such order dated
02.04.2019 made by a Co-ordinate Bench of this Court in W.P. No.14151/2019. On that basis, the counsel for the petitioner seeks parity of treatment.
Shri Ashwathappa learned Panel Counsel appearing for the respondent-University vehemently opposes the writ petitioner mainly banking upon the judgment made in petitioner's earlier W.P. No.8903/1998 stating that identical relief claimed by him has been already denied by a Co-ordinate Bench of this Court. Perusal of the said judgment, a copy whereof is at Annexure-R2 to the Statement of Objection does not support that version, even in the least.
3Learned counsel for the respondent - University also banks upon a Division Bench decision of this Court in the case of B. SHAMASUNDAR & OTHERS v. UNIVERSITY OF MYSORE, ILR KAR 196 2533 wherein relevant portion of para 11 reads as under:
"xxx xxx xxx"
However, even this judgment does not much come to the rescue of the respondent-University, inasmuch as, the orders/notifications based upon which the petitioner is claiming relief here being of subsequent origin, their effect needs to be considered while hearing the case for final disposal.
Matter merits deeper consideration and on the principle of parity, as held by the Division Bench of this Court in W.A. 932 and 933/1974 in the case of SRI VINODA & ANOTHER Vs. STATE OF KARNATAKA AND ANOTHER, once an interim relief is granted to one set of litigants, the same needs to be extended to the other similarly circumstanced persons; subject to all just expectations which are not made out herein.
In the above circumstances, interim order issues directing continuance of service of the petitioner in the University wherefrom she was superannuated, until further orders.
All the contentions of parties are kept open Sd/-
Judge."
4
2. Complainant contends that said direction has not been implemented in its letter and spirit. Whereas, Shri D. Aswathappa, learned counsel appearing for the respondent would contend that by order dated 26th May, 2020 the direction issued by the learned Single Judge has been complied. He would also submit that salary has been ordered to be released commencing from 26th May, 2020. However, Shri Ranganatha S. Jois learned counsel appearing for the complainant would contend that no salary has been received by the complainant. He would also contend that in these proceedings an order came to be passed on 19th June, 2020, that in compliance of the order passed by the learned Single Judge, University is bound to pay the salary and as such, he relies upon the order passed in CCC No.1662 of 2017 dated 28th March, 2018 to contend that there should be parity even in the matters of contempt. Hence, he prays for continuation of the proceedings.
3. At the outset, it requires to be noticed that for continuation of the contempt proceedings against the contemnor, the necessary ingredient which has to be satisfied by the complainant is, positive direction issued having not 5 been complied by respondent and that too willfully. In the instant case, the direction which came to be issued by the learned single Judge which has been extracted hereinabove would clearly indicate that respondent-University was directed to continue the services of the petitioner in the University wherefrom she was superannuated. In other words, the direction was to continue the services of the petitioner in the University, which order has since been complied by the University by order dated 26th May, 2020 produced by the complainant himself at Annexure-D. Thus, the direction which came to be issued stood complied. As to whether the said order/direction is to be read and understood as having directed the respondent to pay the salary also cannot be inferred and as such, question of continuing the contempt proceedings against the respondent does not arise. In fact, Sri D. Aswathappa, learned counsel for the respondent has submitted that after the order of appointment/continuation of petitioner pursuant to the interim direction issued by the learned Single Judge having been passed on 26th May, 2020, one month salary has been ordered to be released in favour of the respondent which is disputed by the learned counsel 6 appearing for the complainant, cannot be gone into in these proceedings. If at all the complainant is aggrieved by non- payment of salary, he would be at liberty to approach the learned Single Judge seeking a positive direction to the respondent in that regard. Subject to these observations, contempt proceedings stands dropped.
Sd/-
JUDGE Sd/-
JUDGE lnn