Intentional flouting of court orders and interference with the administration of justice constitute gross criminal contempt.

( 1 ) HEARD the arguments of the learned counsel for the complainant as well as the learned counsel for the Respondents/accused Nos. 1 and 2 and carefully perused the case papers with their assistance. Though the matter came up or listed before the Court to hear regarding the framing of charges against the respondents/accused, with the consent of both sides, we have heard the matter for its final disposal and it is accordingly disposed of finally by this order.

( 2 ) THE complainant is one Smt. Raziy Mehaboob Patel and the respondents/accused are: Sri Rajesab Hasan Dongre Janavekar and the City Municipal Council, Bijapur represented by its Commissioner and they were parties to the writ petition filed before this Court in W. P. No. 8430/99. The said writ petition came to be disposed of on 23-8-1999 with certain directions. The relevant portion of the order made by this Court in W. P. No. 8430/99 on 23-8-1999 reads as under :"4. Taking into account the facts and circumstances of the case, the second respondent shall call for fresh tenders fixing the upset price of Rs. 14,00,000/- and auction the rights to the party that tenders the highest offer, for a period that may be specified by the first respondent. The period shall not be more than three years. The upset price of Rs. 14 lakhs shall be per year. During the pendency of calling for tenders, till auction is finalised, the third respondent shall continue to collect the fees of Sunday Bazar at Bijapur City. The rate shall be determined as per Annexure-D. If there is no better offer than Rs. 14,00,000/-, the order passed at Annexure-I shall stand revived. The writ petition is disposed of accordingly. "

( 3 ) THE complainant herein was the petitioner and the respondents/accused Nos. 1 and 2 were Respondents 2 and 3 respectively in the said writ petition filed before this Court and they were fully aware of the nature of the order passed by this Court in W. P. No. 8430/99 on 23-8-1999. While the matter stood thus, it is stated that the complainant Smt. Raziy, after obtaining a certified copy of the order passed by this Court in the writ petition, requested the Respondent No. 2 to call for the fresh tender as the complainant was ready to offer her bid for Rs. 14,00,000/- as has been undertaken by her before this Court in the above writ petition, but inspite of that, it is stated that the Respondent No. 2 did not call for a fresh tender and postponed the same for one reason or the other, only with a view to favour the Respondent No. 1. Ultimately the Respondent/accused No. 2 called for the tender for collection of fee for the Sunday Bazar by publishing the notification in the Kannada-Daily on 6-3-2000, fixing the date of auction on 20-3-2000 as per Annexure-D. It is stated that on 20-3-2000, the complainant went to the office of the second respondent and found that except her, no other bidders were there to bid in the auction on 20-3-2000 at 4 O' clock in the office of the second respondent. The complainant offered her bid for Rs. 14,00,000/- for the collection of fees for Sunday Bazar commencing from 2000 to 2003. On the same day, she submitted a written representation in compliance of the order made by this Court in the writ petition that she is ready to offer Rs. 14,00,000/- and a copy of the said writ petition is filed at Annexure-F. On the same day, she gave another representation along- with a copy of the order of this Court in the writ petition as per Annexure-G. But suddenly at about 4. 30 p. m. on the same day, the Commissioner of the Respondent No. 2 City Municipal Council came out from his office and informed the complainant that they have postponed the tender. He did not however assign any reason for postponing the tender. Therefore the complainant made a representation to the second respondent to know the reasons as to why the auction was postponed. A copy of the said representation dated 20-3-2000 is filed at Annexure-H. It is stated that there were only thr