Karnataka HC Drops Contempt Case After Yadgir DC Timely Rejects Ex-Serviceman’s Request For Alternative Land

The complainant filed a contempt petition alleging disobedience of the Single Judge’s order dated 28 April 2026 in W.P. No. 200449 of 2026, which directed the Deputy Commissioner to consider the complainant’s representations dated 10 July 2025 and pass appropriate orders within three months of receiving the order.

The Deputy Commissioner’s compliance affidavit stated that, after obtaining reports and reviewing the relevant documents, the representations were rejected by an endorsement dated 4 June 2026, which was communicated to the complainant by speed post on 6 June 2026.

The affidavit was filed on 15 October 2026 and included an unconditional apology.

The petition invoked Sections 11 and 12 of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971, read with Article 215 of the Constitution of India, which empower the High Court to address contempt of court.

The operative direction required the Deputy Commissioner to consider the specified representations and pass appropriate orders in accordance with law within three months of receipt of the Single Judge’s order.

The Court’s decision turned on whether that direction had been complied with; no separate precedent or broader contempt-law doctrine was discussed.

The Court considered the compliance affidavit and the documents it described, including the 4 June 2026 endorsement and evidence of its communication on 6 June 2026.

It concluded that the Deputy Commissioner had considered the representations and complied with the direction within the time allowed.

On that basis, the Court took the affidavit on record and found no further matter requiring consideration in the contempt proceedings.