IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT _
DATED THIS THE 10th DAY OF DECE-FvE'BE:R,: "
PRESENT
THE HON'BLE M,rmj_UST:C_E'N KUIvIAR':'_V_' 1'
THE HONBLE MR:_J"IISTT_CE_ S.REE.NNASE GOWDA
WRIT PETITION' NOE:-§N03 ..fS--KAT}
BETWEEN:
SR1 S.S. RANGANATH»
S/O SRI"S;AS.,:iSAS*I;'RY,'-,5 _
AGED ABGI.}'I"--5V5._YEA"R:s_; - _ --
RESID"ING._A'1" NO; 5.22'. _.
2NDAMA.IN.» * ._ '
B.V.S LAYO.UT, BILEKALL ,
BANNIERGHATTA' ROAD,
- BANGALORE -- 560----Q7'"6.
' .{IV3jjy'=SR14C.V.$UDHINDRA, ADV.,)
'§._N'T)E:
THE ELECTION COMMISSION
V. REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY.
' 3;3T.F'LOOR, K.S.C.M.F. BUILDING,
N08, CUNNINGHAM ROAD,
.. BANGALORE -- 560 052
PETITIONER
. RESPONDENT
THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDERARTICLE’ E26
81 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA»..PRAY1N«G To
QUASH THE ORDER PASSED” «BY TIIE’-.’I–IoN’i.Bi,E
KARNATAKA ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBLTNAL’~D’i”X_ *I..2′.:2;o_oaoIII
CONTEMPT CASE NO. 78/2007 ‘*AS<.PER 13.NI\£E}:-i\»i:"'I/END
PLEASED TO DIRECT THIi1*'iT_RIBUN_AL TO,»Rf3FUND'; THE",
AMOUNT TO THE PETITIO-NER IN" INTEREST OF"
JUSTICE.
TI-IIS ?ETITIONJ”COIvI’INe{ oNVi”~«EOR RRELIMINARY
HEARING THIS DAY,” KIJIjuAR’–;}1..I,v’DELIVERED THE
FOLLOWING: * ‘ ‘
filédiivéhallenging the order passed
by the’.Karnatakaf’Adniiiaistrative Tribunai (for short ‘the
Tribunal’) ‘”‘whieh non–payment of costs in
of thevv—order passed by the Tribunal which is
the High Court as well as by the Apex Court
contempt as defined under Section 2(b} of the
Contenipt of Courts Act, 1971. However, on the date when
it «said finding was recorded, the petitioner had already
deposited the costs and therefore the said amount was
wdirected to be paid to the complainant in the contempt
it/I
granted, it will not amount to wiilful dis0bedierie’e’,” .
substance.
3. In this View of the V1nattAer__. “”w_e
justification to interfere uIith«..,rA’L:.fl<1e ordmfi the
Tribunal. The writ petitign is'.c1eV"ei(1 '<VV)'fzi1erit's'.'"Ae'eordingIy,
it is dismissed.
$,UDGE
sd/~
JUDGE