Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 1, Cited by 0]

Karnataka High Court

Malkangouda vs Mr Munish Moudgil Ias on 18 February, 2026

                                               -1-
                                                       NC: 2026:KHC-K:1610-DB
                                                       CCC No. 200363 of 2025


                   HC-KAR




                               IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

                                      KALABURAGI BENCH

                          DATED THIS THE 18TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2026

                                            PRESENT
                              THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R.NATARAJ
                                              AND
                        THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE TYAGARAJA N. INAVALLY


                         CIVIL CONTEMPT PETITION NO. 200363 OF 2025


                   BETWEEN:

                         MALKANGOUDA
                         S/O BASANAGOUDA,
                         AGE : 45 YEARS,
                         OCC: AGRICULTURE,
                         R/O: WARD NO.2, PATEL WADI,
                         SINDHANOOR TALUK,
                         SINDHANUR,
                         DIST: RAICHUR - 584 128.
                                                              ...COMPLAINANT
Digitally signed
by SACHIN
                   (BY SRI PUNITH MARKAL, ADVOCATE FOR SRI MAHANTESH
Location: HIGH
COURT OF           PATIL, ADVOCATE)
KARNATAKA
                   AND:

                   1.    MR. MUNISH MOUDGIL, I.A.S.,
                         THE STATE OF KARNATAKA,
                         DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE,
                         M.S.BUILDING, BANGALORE - 560 001.
                         REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY.

                   2.    NITISH K., I.A.S.,
                         THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER,
                         RAICHUR, DIST: RAICHUR - 584 101.
                           -2-
                                   NC: 2026:KHC-K:1610-DB
                                   CCC No. 200363 of 2025


HC-KAR




3.   SRI BASAVANAPPA KALASHETTI,
     THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER,
     LINGASUGUR,
     DIST: RAICHUR - 584 122.

4.   SRI ARUNKUMAR DESAI,
     THE TAHASILDAR, SINDHANOOR
     TALUK SINDHANOOR,
     DIST: RAICHUR - 584 128.

5.   SRI PANDU,
     THE PRINCIPAL,
     GOVERNMENT FIRST GRADE DEGREE COLLEGE,
     SINDHANOOR, TALUK SINDHANOOR,
     DIST: RAICHUR - 584 128.
                              ...ACCUSED / RESPONDENTS

6.   THE STATE OF KARNATAKA,
     DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE,
     M.S. BUILDING, BANGALORE - 560 001,
     REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY.
                                      ....PERFORMA PARTY

(BY SRI MALLIKARJUN C. BASAREDDY, GA FOR R1 TO R6)

     THIS CCC IS FILED UNDER SECTION 11 AND 12 OF THE
CONTEMPT OF COURTS ACT R/W ARTICLE 215 OF THE
CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO INITIATE CONTEMPT
PROCEEDINGS AGAINST THE RESPONDENTS/ACCUSED FOR
HAVING DELIBERATELY AND INTENTIONALLY DISOBEYED,
DISRESPECTED AND FOR NOT HAVING COMPLIED WITH THE
ORDER DATED 01.06.2022 PASSED BY THIS HON'BLE COURT
IN WP NO.200801/2022 VIDE ANNEXURE-L AND PUNISH THE
RESPONDENTS/ACCUSED IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW, IN THE
INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY.

    THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY,
ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:
                               -3-
                                          NC: 2026:KHC-K:1610-DB
                                          CCC No. 200363 of 2025


HC-KAR




CORAM:      HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R.NATARAJ
            and
            HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE TYAGARAJA N. INAVALLY


                         ORAL ORDER

(PER: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R.NATARAJ) This contempt petition is filed alleging non compliance of the order dated 01.06.2022 passed by the learned Single Judge in W.P.No.200801/2022.

2. The complainant had filed W.P.No.200801/2022 seeking for a direction to the accused to consider the representation dated 18.01.2022 and to direct the accused to compensate him for taking unlawful possession of his property. The said writ petition was allowed and a direction was issued to accused No.3 to consider the representation submitted by the complainant and pass appropriate orders and take necessary steps for expediting the acquisition. The complainant claims that the aforesaid order is not complied and hence this contempt petition. -4-

NC: 2026:KHC-K:1610-DB CCC No. 200363 of 2025 HC-KAR

3. The learned Principal Government Advocate submits that in compliance with the direction issued by the learned Single Judge in W.P.No.200801/2022, the accused No.3 has considered the representation of the complainant and passed an order dated 14.07.2022. He therefore submits that the order passed by the learned Single Judge is complied. This is however countered by the learned counsel for the complainant who contends that the accused No.3 was directed to expedite the acquisition process. However by the impugned communication, the accused No.3 has held that no further orders is necessary as the land in question was not utilized for the purpose of which it is acquired. He therefore contends that the accused have committed continuous contempt by issuing the impugned endorsement.

4. We have considered the submissions made by the learned counsel for the complainant as well as the learned Principal Government Advocate for the accused. -5-

NC: 2026:KHC-K:1610-DB CCC No. 200363 of 2025 HC-KAR

5. It appears from the order passed by the learned Single Judge that the accused No.3 was directed to consider the representation of the complainant. Accordingly the accused No.3 has passed an order and issued an endorsement dated 14.07.2022 holding that the land in question is not required for the purpose of which it is acquired and therefore no further steps can be taken for determining the compensation. Therefore, the representation of the complainant is considered by the accused No.3. If the complainant is aggrieved by the order passed by the accused No.3, he is bound to question the same in the manner known to law.

6. In view of the consideration of the representation of the complainant, nothing survives for consideration in this contempt petition. Hence, contempt petition is dropped.

7. Having regard to the fact that the representation of the complainant is considered, we refrain from passing any orders on I.A.No.1/2025 which is filed by -6- NC: 2026:KHC-K:1610-DB CCC No. 200363 of 2025 HC-KAR the complainant for condonation of delay in filing the contempt petition. Accordingly, I.A.No.1/2025 also stand disposed off.

Sd/-

(R.NATARAJ) JUDGE Sd/-

(TYAGARAJA N. INAVALLY) JUDGE SN List No.: 1 Sl No.: 23