Karnataka HC Drops Contempt Case Over Aided-School Teacher’s Transfer Request After Officials Belatedly Consider Her Representations

The complainant filed a contempt petition alleging non-compliance with the Single Judge’s order dated 31 August 2026 in W.P. No. 203298/2026.

That order directed the concerned respondents to consider her representations and pass appropriate orders in accordance with law within three weeks of receiving the order.

Respondent No. 3, the Block Education Officer, filed an affidavit stating that the representations had been considered and an endorsement issued to the complainant on 23 October 2026.

He acknowledged delay, attributed it to administrative reasons, and tendered an unconditional apology.

The Court recorded that respondent No. 4 had been dismissed from the contempt proceedings by an earlier order.

The petition was brought under Sections 11 and 12 of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971, and Article 215 of the Constitution of India.

The Court considered whether the direction in the earlier writ order had been complied with and whether anything remained for consideration in the contempt proceedings.

It cited no precedent and did not set out a separate test for determining wilful disobedience.

The Single Judge had directed the respondents to consider the complainant’s representations and pass appropriate orders within three weeks.

The compliance affidavit and the endorsement dated 23 October 2026 showed that the representations had been considered, albeit after the stipulated period; respondent No. 3 also apologized for the delay.

On that basis, the Court accepted the compliance affidavit and concluded that the writ order had been complied with and nothing further remained to be considered in the contempt petition.

Notice to the respondents was discharged, with liberty reserved to the complainant to challenge the endorsement if she wished.