High Court Karnataka High Court

R Sureshkumar vs Dr. K Balaraju on 25 October, 2010

Karnataka High Court
R Sureshkumar vs Dr. K Balaraju on 25 October, 2010
Author: J.S.Khehar(Cj) And A.S.Bopanna
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, BANGALORE

DATED THIS THE 25TH DAY OF' OCTOBER, 2010
PRESENT

THE HONBLE MR. J. s. KHEHAR, CHIEF JUSTICE.
AND' A A

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A. S.   4

CCC NO. 1157/20f1:o     '-    

BETWEEN:

R SURESHKUMAR
s/0 LATE A RAJAPPA

AGED ABOUT 54 YEARS

R/AT AKSHANTHA NILA__YA. . _ V 1. .
HARIGE, VIDYANAGAR POST =   L

S1-IIMQGA" "fif   ...COMPLAINANT
[BY SR1"? N..JAGALi*'VEESvH_."A:W.J

AND:

 -  Dr.,_'1<'~:.13.A_AARAJU"'*  ..... .. »
 "AGED AB'0UT_45 YEARS
 MANAGER (RD 5: A)
E'--MY7SOORE"PAPER--§\/[ILLS LTD,

BHADRAVATHE
SHIMOGA DISTRiCT ...ACCUSED

j [BY EV! R C RAVI. ADV.)

 " '=-.._T1~i'Is CONTEMPT PETITION IS FILED UNDER
 'SECIHONS 11 & 12 OF CONTEMPT OF COURTS ACT
 PRAYING TO TAKE COGNIZANCE AND PUNISH THE



ACCUSED FOR DISOBEDIENCE OF ORDER DATED
12.07.2010 PASSED IN W.P.NO. 17095/2010 VIBE
ANNEXURE--C AND ORDER DATED 24.06.2009 PASSED IN
W.P.NO. 14783/2008 C/W 11977/2007 VIBE ANN--A. 

THIS c.c.c COMING ON FOR ORDERS TI<:I~s]'jr3A§',

CHIEF JUSTICE MADE THE FOLLOWING:

ORDER

J.S.KI-IEHAR, C.J. (Oral):

Counter affidavit _: _”on A ‘ — A lbehallfi . of:

accused/ respondent has The
same has been all just
exceptions. A copy thereof l’5een*:lV..1}rrnished to the
learned /”petitioner.

21.. came to be filed
alleging ‘the order dated 24.6.2009

passed – while disposing of

– 4.__783

‘Learned counsel for accused / respondent states,

thatithellu_Orde’f’V.dated 24.6.2009 had not been complied

with, on account of the fact, that fife writ appeal had

it been ‘preferred against the aforesaid order dated

0 24.60.2009. However, after disposal of I.D.A.No.45/ 2000

the Presiding Officer of the Labour Court, D.K.,

Mangalore on 03.02.2010, the writ appeal filed by the

the

accused / respondent having been rendered infructuous,
was accordingly withdrawn. It is submitted, that the
accused/respondent shall calculate and pay wages to
the complainant/petitioner for the period from
25.6.2009 to 03.02.2010 in terms of the orderj”pa’s_se.d
by this Court on 24.6.2009 [while ~
w.P.No.14783/2008). it

4. In View of the statement rriade
counsel for the accused.V/_0re.sponAdent._ no
justification to retain the ‘conte.n10}A:1tv.upeVt§ition on
the board of this The 2iri;star’it:contempt petition

is accordingly d.isposed–V:.of, “.the””‘.d’irection to the

accused’/’resrpondiefnt w’age”s in terms of the order
dated °e24;6.20V00’jV-»’- period from 25.06.2009 to

03.02.20 01’0__dtQ Vt’11.e4V’AcoIn.pIainant / petitioner within one

wee}<{fro111toda'y–..vv_ _

A A * .. £)jispos:e~d__of in the aforesaid terms. *
Chief Justice
.sa/–

Fidqe

Index Y/N