IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA CIRCUIT BENCH AT DHARWAD DATED THIS THE 4111 DAY OF NOVEMBER 201 1 PRESENT THE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE SUBHASH B.ADI AND THE HONELE MR. JUSTICE K.NKESHAVANARAYANA CCC NO2373 OF 2011 (CIVIL) BETWEEN: SRI .ABDUL GANI MANIYAR 5/0 MOHIDDINSAB AGE: 70 YEARS, 0CC: MECHANIC R/O PADAKOT GALLI, RAMDURG DIST: BELGAUM COMPLAINANT (BY SRI.AHAMAD ALl JRAHAMAN SHAH, ADV.) AND: THE KARNATAKA STATE BOARD OF WAKES, CUNNINGHAM ROAD BANGALORE, BY ITS ADMINISTRATOR SRLAKBARULLA MIRJA . SRI.ABDULWAHID S/O ABDULSAB KHAZI AGE: MAJOR, 0CC: RETD. MASTER R/O NAVIPETH, RAMDURG DIST: BELGAUM, BY ADMINISTRATOR 3. DISTRICT WAKE ADVISORY COMMVVFEE, BELGAUM DIST: BELGAUM, BY ITS ADMINISTRATOR SHRITUSDEEQPATEL ...ACCUSED (SRI.SADIK N.GOODWALA, ADV. FOR Al AND A3 SRLR.K.KULKARNI, ADV. FOR A2) 2 This CCC is filed under Section 11 and 12 of the Contempt of Courts Act. 1971 r/w Article 215 of the Constitution of India praying to initiate contempt proceedings against the respondents under Section 11 and 12 of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 for their willful disobedience of the order passed in Ann A in CCC No.2255/I I dated 20.4.2011. This CCC coming on for orders this day. SUBHASH B. ADI J., made the following: ORDER This contempt of court case is filed against the non compliance of the order of this Court in WP No.66753/20 10 dated 20.9.20 10. 2. This Court had directed the Wakf Board to conduct an enquiry if deemed necessary into the allegation made against the erstwhile Management and the President and complete the same within a period of three months from the date of receipt of the order. Thereafter. without further loss of time. authorities shall conduct election to the Managing Committee of the Wakf as expeditiously as possible. 3. Though the writ petition was disposed of on 20.9.20 10 itself, no steps were taken to conduct the I 3 election. Since the direction ns not complied with, the complainant had filed a contempt of court case No.2255/2011. The said contempt case was disposed of by order dated 20.4.2011 as the Election Officer has been appointed. No doubt, as per Annexure-D. the Tahsildar, Ramdurga has been appointed as the Election Officer. however, no steps were taken to conduct the elections. As such, the petitioner — complainant again moved this contempt of court case inter-alia seeking action against the respondents. 4. Now, a memo is filed along with a notification dated 3.11.2011 wherein the Tahsildar, Ramadurg has fixed the election date as 12.11.2011. 5. Learned counsel appearing for the Wakf Board submitted that even the Wakf Board made a request to the Tahsildar to conduct the election and it is the Tahsildar who did not take steps to conduct the election. Waki Board had also intimated the Tahsildar that failure to conduct the election max aniount to contempt of order of this Court. 3 6. The Tahsilclar has not been made party in this proceedings and the Tahsildar has been appointed way back in April 201 1 itself. Prima facie. the steps have been taken by the Board to conduct the election and the failure is on the part of the Tahsildar and the Tahsildar not being party to the proceedings and now as the Tahsildar has fixed the date of the election, we find no ground to initiate the contempt of court case. Accordingly, petition is dismissed. Sd/ JUDGE RV JUDGE