I IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA CIRCUIT BENCH AT GULBARGA DATED THIS THE 16TFl I)AY OF SEPTEMBER 2010 PRESENT THE HON’BLE MRJUSTICE NKUMAR AND THE HON’BLE MRJUSTICE SUBHASH B.ADI CCC NO.306 1 OF 2010 (CIVIL) BETWEEN: Hussen Badashah Sb Mohideen Basha Sajjade Age major, 0cc: Lecturer Economics Navaraspur Colony, Bagalkot Road, Bijapur- 586 101. ...COMPLAINANT (BY SRI.RVILASKUMAR. ADV.) AND: 1. SECAB Association 12. Navhag, Bijapur. by its President Sri.Shamshuddin Abdulla Punekar Age 72 years. R/o Navaraspur, Bijapur-586 101. 2. Akbar Shamshuddin Path Aged 50 years, 2 Secretary SECAB R/o: Navaraspur. New Hudco Cross. Bijapur586 101. 3. Smt.Roshanara W/o Zaffar Sadhiq A.Afrad Aged 50 years, Principal A.RS.Inamdar Arts, Science College, R/o: Navbag, Bijapur— 586 101. RESPONDENTS (BY SRI.AMEET KUMAR DESHPANDE. ADV) This CCC is filed under Sections 11 and 12 of the Contempt of Court Act praying that this Hon’hle Court may be pleased to, initiate the contempt proceedings against the respondents 1 to 3 for not complying the order of this Hon’ble Court in writ appeal No, 10230/2009 dated 17.07.2009 which is at Annexure-C. This CCC coming on for orders today, Mr.N.KUMAR, J. made the following: ORDER This complaint is filed alleging violation of the order dated 17.07.2009 passed in W.A. 10230/2009 connected with W.A.1033/2008. In the said appeal, this court directed that the employee is entitled for reinstatement into service with continuity of service and 50% back wages only. Aggrieved by the same, the 3 management preferred Special Leave Petition before the Apex Court. The Apex Court has staved that portion of the order of this court, wherein 50°o back wages is ordered, 2. It is not in dispute that the employee is reinstated into service and the only question is regarding continuity of service. The complaint is continuity of service is not extended. Before the Apex Court the legality of this order is questioned and respondents have reinstated the employee, further the Apex Court has staved that portion of the order directing 50% back wages, there is no willful disobedience of the order of this Court. In that view of the matter, we do not find any justification in this contempt petition. Accordingly the contempt petition is rejected. JUDGE Sdf JUDGE SBN