SEEMA Vs. PANCHAKSHARAYYA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) OUR contempt jurisdiction is invoked to punish the respondents for deliberately not paying certain amount which it was stated to be due to the contractor who had executed some plumbing work in favour of the respondent-Commissioner, Hubli-Dharward Development Authority, Hubli. Petitioner had invoked writ jurisdiction of this Court though for such purpose this Court will never issue a writ of mandamus for payment of money in favour of persons who are said to have executed some works for public authorities.

(2.) WRIT jurisdiction is not one to be invoked as though it is a jurisdiction akin to an executing Court, for enforcement of payment of money in favour of contractors who claim to have executed some work whether in a proper manner or otherwise in favour of public bodies.

(3.) MR.Veeresh. H.M, learned counsel who claims to have received instructions from the respondent-accused and wants to place his power before us, makes a submission before us to the effect that some payments, in fact have been made subsequent to the passing of the order, dated 01.04.2009 and therefore there is no deliberate intention to violate or disobey the Court order.