1
IN THE HIGH coum or KARNATAKA AT BANGALQRE ”
DATED “mzs “ms 137″ rzmv 0:: June 2ofq9 f–.._ F.
PRESENT
THE HOWBLE MR.3U$TICE_.K_.L. b§A£{l3«UNAT}¥..”._ ‘
Aw u %
THE 1»-:o~’s:.E Ma.3us?:<:E C_;'i§;'_i§fi¥§§,§:RASWAMY
CGNTEMPT GF cream' CASEAV1NG;V2=58§£G§g.n(C§VIL)
BETWEEN:
N SHRINIVRS ;
Sit} LATE NAGAPPA ‘ _ 5
AGED ABUQT 31 , –.
we :43, KAVERI Nu:>I..£:oAD 1: ' 8Ri?*é3£2VANNA&3»'5'\R_ . -- . BANGALORE ~ 566 019.' _ ,..COMPLAINANT
{av SR1: A ‘J’A§f£RN§iFH2a!§,”A§?JOCATE}
Awe: ” ‘ ‘
1; , ‘ ‘GOVERNMF.£NT{3F KARNATAKA
3-‘IE3i~%AN;3,SOU£}Hfi.__
.Bfi&%si(3ALQRE ~ ._
REP” 534 27:3 €,~:~.+1_E;=, SECREFARY’
5:2; suiawxmai. ‘same.
712. g aawégiokg éévauopmsmt Aumcmw
.- Ȥ<t.:MARA max WESST
v " s:~u<::HAMuNDI RQAD
_ "BANG!"-:LORE n.
. Rspw yrs commxssxomz.
— sag SEDDAIAH. “ACCUSED
“(Er sax: SRIDHAR R HIREMATH, A£>:>zT:c::NA:.,
Gcaveammenrr ADVGCATE ma ACCU$ED Ncm,
sax: vxsmu D eam”, ADVGCATE ma ACCUSED N02 )
THIS CONTEMFT OF COURT CASE IS FILED UNDER SECTION 11
AND 12 OF THE CGNTEMPT OF COURTS ACT PRAYENCS TO INITIATE
CONTEMFT PRQCEEDING XXGAINST THE SECDND ACCUSED FOR
VIDLATENG THEE GRDERS OF THIS HUMBLE COURT IN WRIT PETITIiOf’~3i
NCL14834/2008 DATED 17.12.2068 AND PROSECUTE THE SECQNIT)
ACCUSED .
mas CONTEMPT or mum” CASE COMING on FQa’:’-oR.i§E§fs”i ‘
BEFORE me coum” THIS DAY, x.i..MAummrm, J.’,w_i9:;:s._DE–._.i”H’_E
FOLi.OwiNG:– _
Thauah direction has been iséuagi thé ie’ar’=r§:éd.i._;§.i.ngi%
Judge in w.P.14s34/2003 to the BVénV§éiore
Deveiapmant Authority to ‘<itiii'3ideé¥r ;;;%.,é=.=.z;:$'pj:i:»ation of the
complainant for ::on1pavs:ai§'r:j.ate*v–._;.__a§$;:_£$i:fii:,riiént, the
campiainant'!jas__uf§'n'éces$ar§i3v.b_érrayed the Chief Secretary of
the State as my ta this 'é§i2..{éi°r_ipii petition. This shows that
with an ebii'qu_e m€it'i*.z§§," *'§hev'comp|ai_nant has impieaded the
C:i§.£VefV timgigh niiireiief is ciaimad against the Chief
Secriéi=:i9¢._' made the Chief Secretary as 3 party
i'V3:'A{ih'riecesSa«riiy,.__v'tifi' Acarnpiainant has to gay the cost of
' téxfiia first accused, the Chief Secretary. So far
"-»._'V'a§"'i::i'the.réiief in the contempt aetition is concerned, the
'i'é3{:;'ned..§caunsei far the second accused has fiied a Memo
that an endorsement has been issued to the
6/
3
complainant cm 16.6.2009 gmrsuant ta the appiicafio_r3″”i1éaVV;~.§.’e : T
by the compiainant for appointment on corn.:;f:z’a_A$;-3*i§nVzA:A3:Vte_ 3
gmunds.
Therefore, the fietition is cios’é{:j’;”-V_
KM