SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Article Pause Article
judgment-img

2025 Supreme(Online)(Kar) 9433

KARNATAKA HIGH COURT
SHIVAPPA – Appellant
Versus
SHRI. SATHYANARAYAN SHETTY – Respondent
CCC 200028 / 2025



IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA KALABURAGI BENCH DATED THIS THE 28TH DAY OF APRIL, 2025 PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE K NATARAJAN AND THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE VIJAYKUMAR A. PATIL CIVIL CONTEMPT PETITION NO.200028 OF 2025 C/W WRIT APPEAL NO.200095 OF 2025 IN CCC NO.200028/2025:

BETWEEN:

SHIVAPPA S/O AYYAPPA, AGE: 48 YEARS, OCC: GAZE READER, TUNGABADRA LEFT BANK CANAL NO.1, CANAL, SUB-DIVISION, KALLURU VILLAGE, TQ. MANVI, DIST. RAICHUR-584118.

…COMPLAINANT (BY SRI. MAHANTESH PATIL, ADVOCATE)

AND:

1. SHRI. SATHYANARAYAN SHETTY(I/C), THE SUPERINTENDENT ENGINEER, IRRIGATION DEPARTMENT, TUNGABHADRA CANAL, CONSTRUCTION CIRCLE, YARAMARAS (CAMP)-584135.

2. SHRI. S. BASAVANA GOUDA (I/C), THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, IRRIGATION DEPARTMENT, NO.5, CANAL DIVISION, YARAMARAS (CAMP)-584135.

3. SHRI. G.H.SUNDAR BABU, THE ASSISTANT EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, NO. 1, CANAL DIVISION, KALLURU VILLAGE, TQ. MANVI, DIST. RAICHUR-584118.

… ACCUSED

4. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA REPRESENTED BY CHIEF ENGINEER, WRD, ANANDA RAO CIRCLE, BENGALURU-560009.

…PROFARMA PARTY (BY SRI. NAVEEN R. NATH, SR. ADVOCATE A/W SRI. SUDARSHAN M, ADVOCATES FOR R/A-1 TO 3; SRI. MALLIKARJUN C. BASAREDDY, GA FOR R/A-4)

THIS CIVIL CONTEMPT PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTIONS 11 AND 12 OF THE CONTEMPT OF COURT ACT READ WITH ARTICLE 215 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO INITIATE CONTEMPT PROCEEDINGS AGAINST THE RESPONDENT/PETITIONERS FOR HAVING DELIBERATELY AND INTENTIONALLY DISOBEYED, DISRESPECTED AND FOR NOT HAVING COMPLIED WITH THE INTERIM ORDER DATED 27-09- 2024 PASSED BY THIS HON’BLE COURT IN WP NO. 202677/2024 (L-ID) VIDE ANNEXURE-C AND PUNISH THE RESPONDENTS/PETITIONERS IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW.

IN WRIT APPEAL NO. 200095 OF 2025:

BETWEEN:

1. THE SUPERINTENDING ENGINEER, IRRIGATION DEPARTMENT, TUNGABHADRA CANAL, CONSTRUCTION CIRCLE, YARAMARAS (CAMP)-584135, DIST. RAICHUR.

2. THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, IRRIGATION DEPARTMENT, NO. 5, CANAL DIVISION, YARAMARAS (CAMP)-58413, DIST. RAICHUR

3. THE ASSISTANT EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, NO. 1, CANAL SUB DIVISION, KALLUR-581118, TQ. MANVI DIST. RAICHUR …APPELLANTS (BY SRI. NAVEEN R. NATH, SR. ADVOCATE A/W SRI. SUDARSHAN M, ADVOCATES)

AND:

SRI. SHIVAPPA S/O AYYAPPA, OCC: GUAGE REPORTER, TUNGABHADRA LEFT BANK CANAL, NO.1, CANAL SUB-DIVISION, KALLUR-581118, MANVI TALUK, RAICHUR DISTRICT.

…RESPONDENT (BY SRI. MAHANTESH PATIL, ADVOCATE)

THIS WRIT APPEAL IS FILED UNDER SECTION 4 OF THE KARNATAKA HIGH COURT ACT, PRAYING TO CALL FOR THE RECORDS IN WP NO. 202677/2024 DATED 27.09.2024 ON FILE OF THE LEARNED SINGLE JUDGE. B) MODIFY THE ORDER OF THE LEARNED SINGLE JUDGE PASSED IN WP NO. 202677/2024 DATED 27.09.2024.

THIS PETITION AND APPEAL, COMING ON FOR ORDERS THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:

CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE K NATARAJAN AND HON'BLE MR JUSTICE VIJAYKUMAR A. PATIL ORAL ORDER (PER: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE VIJAYKUMAR A. PATIL)

This intra-court appeal is filed challenging the interim order dated 27.09.2024 passed in WP No.202677/2024 by the learned Single Judge of this Court.

2. After arguing this matter for quite sometime, Sri. Naveen R Nath, learned Senior counsel appearing for the appellants fairly submits that the appellant-corporation would comply with the requirement of Section 17B of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (herein after referred to as the ‘ID Act’).

3. It is submitted that the respondent-employee has already completed 60 years of age and hence, the question of his reinstatement into service, would not arise at all. He further submits that he would make a submission on merits before the learned Single Judge, in the pending writ petition.

4. It is submitted that if learned Single Judge is requested to dispose off the matter at the earliest, the ends of justice would be met.

5. Per contra, Sri. Mahantesh Patil, learned counsel for respondent-employee submits that this matter may be disposed off by directing the appellant to comply with the Section 17B of the ID Act within a time bond manner and therefore, a request may be made to learned Single Judge to dispose off the pend

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top