Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
Anu Sivaraman, Vijaykumar A. Patil, JJ.
Mr. P. Ramanjineya S/O Late Pillappa - Complainant
Versus
State Of Karnataka Urban Development Department - Accused
Civil Contempt Petition No.241 of 2024, Civil Contempt Petition No.243 of 2024
Decided On : 20-11-2025
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. court's order requiring specific actions from administrative bodies. (Para 1) |
| 2. rejection of development rights certificate request. (Para 2) |
| 3. no willful disobedience found; liberty to challenge order. (Para 3) |
ORDER :
VIJAYKUMAR A. PATIL, J.
These contempt petitions are filed alleging willful disobedience of the order dated 29.01.2021 passed in W.P.Nos.36366/2017 and 36367/2017 (LB-BMP). Paragraph Nos.8 of the order reads as under:
"8. As the file of the petitioners relating to issuance of TDR is pending before the 2nd respondent-BBMP, the 2nd respondent-BBMP is directed to return the file to 6th respondent-BDA within a period of one month from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order, with necessary clarifications as sought for by the BDA along with necessary documents, to enable the BDA to take further action. The 6th respondent- BDA, on receipt of the file from the second respondent-BBMP, in accordance with Section 14- A of the Act and Rule 3 of the Karnataka Town and Country Planning (Benefit of Development Rights) Rules 2016 to take appropriate decision with regard to entitlement and issuance of TDRs to the petitioners, within a period of three months from the date of receipt of the file from the second respondent-BBMP."
2. Learned counsel for accused Nos.2, 5, 6 and 7 has filed a memo along with the orders dated 12.02.2024 and 14.02.2024. The said orders indicate that the request of the complainant for issuance of the Development Rights Certificate has been rejected.
3. In view of the aforesaid detailed orders, we are of the opinion that there is no willful disobedience of the order passed by the learned Single Judge. Accordingly, the contempt proceedings are dropped granting liberty to the complainant to challenge the said orders, if so advised.
Notice issued to accused is discharged.
AI
The mere rejection of a request for a Development Rights Certificate does not constitute willful disobedience of a court order regarding its issuance.
The court underscored the necessity of compliance with its orders, establishing that willful disobedience warrants contempt findings and penalties, and altering compliance orders post-finding is impe....
The court established that wilful disobedience of clear court orders constitutes contempt, requiring compliance within a specified timeframe.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
