The disposal of a representation, regardless of whether the outcome is favorable or unfavorable to the petitioner, constitutes compliance with a court direction to consider the representation, thereby precluding a finding of willful disobedience in contempt proceedings.

Digitally signed by AMBIKA H B Location: High Court of Karnataka COMMISSIONER

THIS CCC IS FILED UNDER SECTIONS 11 AND 12 OF THE CONTEMPT OF COURTS ACT, 1971, PRAYING TO SECURE THE ACCUSED HEREIN, INITIATE CONTEMPT PROCEEDINGS FOR THE NON-COMPLIANCE ORDER PASSED BY THE LEARNED SINGLE JUDGE IN WP NO.27983/2024 DATED 28.10.2024, VIDE ANNEXURE-A AND PUNISH THE ACCUSED IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW.

THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. VIBHU BAKHRU, CHIEF JUSTICE

and

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE C.M. POONACHA

ORAL ORDER

(PER: HON'BLE MR. VIBHU BAKHRU, CHIEF JUSTICE)

1. The complainant has filed the present complaint alleging willful disobedience to the order dated 28.10.2024 passed by the learned Single Judge in Writ Petition No.27983/2024 (LA-BDA). In terms of the said order, the Bangalore Development Authority [BDA] was directed to consider the complainant's representation and pass appropriate orders in accordance with law.

2. The learned counsel appearing for the accused has filed a memo enclosing therewith an endorsement 16.04.2026 issued by the Additional Land Acquisition Officer, BDA which in effect rejects the complainant's representation.

3. Although the complainant has his grievance against the said endorsement, the same cannot be examined in these proceedings. Since the complainant's representation has been disposed of, no proceedings for disobedience of the order passed by this Court can be initiated.

4. The complaint is, accordingly, closed.

5. We clarify that this order will not preclude the complainant from availing substantive remedies, albeit in accordance with law.