The Karnataka High Court ,yesterday, on 23rd April, issued notices to 44 government bodies, sparking interest in the legal community and the public alike. This move raised questions about potential legal issues or concerns these bodies may be facing. The notice indicates a significant legal development that is likely to be closely followed in the coming days.
Karnataka: The Karnataka High Court, on Tuesday, sent a notice to the State of Karnataka and 44 government and semi-government bodies regarding a suo motu public interest litigation (PIL) petition. The petition addresses the State authorities’ failure to comply with court orders. Chief Justice NV Anjaria and Justice Krishna S Dixit’s Bench issued the notice, requiring a response by June 5th.
The petition names the Chief Secretary to the State government and 41 departments, including Agriculture, Revenue, Health, and Home departments. Respondents also include the Bangalore Development Authority (BDA), Bruhat Bengaluru Mahanagara Palike (BBMP), and Karnataka Industrial Areas Development Board (KIADB).
Read Also:Karnataka HC Orders Action Against Rapido Bike Taxi Assaults by Auto Drivers
Initiated on April 8, the Court proceedings stemmed from State authorities’ failure to comply with directives under the Contempt of Courts Act, identified in eleven instances. The Court highlighted this non-compliance as indicative of a lack of respect for judicial directives, noting it as a measure of a government’s democratic commitment.
Sending a strong message that the lax, indifferent, and apathetic attitude of authorities towards court orders and directives unacceptable and must be addressed firmly, the high court started a suo motu public interest litigation on April 8. Numerous petitions submitted under the Contempt of Courts Act, accusing the state government and its agencies of unjustified delays in adhering to court orders.
It elaborated,
“It is through its lively presence and efficient operations that the Courts truly demonstrate their authority. This vitality and efficacy are upheld through the diligent enforcement and prompt obedience of the Court’s judgments and orders,”
The petition requested that the respondents be directed to enforce orders, directives, or judgments promptly and establish an internal oversight mechanism in each organization to ensure timely compliance. It also sought punitive action against officials who intentionally delay implementing order
Read Also:Karnataka HC Dismisses Case Against BJP MLA Shashikala Jolle for ‘Vote-Bribery’
Citing numerous cases of failure to comply with orders, where authorities have delayed action for unjustifiably long periods, the court highlighted that court judgments and orders are often left unaddressed due to laziness or bureaucratic hurdles. This situation severely undermines the administration of justice, eroding public trust in the judicial system and its processes.
It also emphasized that failing to adhere to court orders and directives could undermine public trust in the justice system.
Advocate Madhukar Deshpande represented the High Court in the proceedings.
The State’s representation handled by Additional Government Advocate (AGA) Niloufer Akbar.