Karnataka High Court
CCC/173/2026 of SRI NEELADRI CAR RENTALS Vs SRI.RITVIK RANJANAM PANDEY on 19 September 2026
CNR: KAHC010096942026 NC: 2026:KHC:51401-DB CCC No. 173 of 2026 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 19TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2026 PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JAYANT BANERJI AND THE HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE TARA VITASTA GANJU CIVIL CONTEMPT PETITION NO. 173 OF 2026
HC-KAR
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 19TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2026
PRESENT
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JAYANT BANERJI
AND
THE HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE TARA VITASTA GANJU
CIVIL CONTEMPT PETITION NO. 173 OF 2026
BETWEEN:
SRI. NEELADRI CAR RENTALS
NO 40, 8TH CROSS, 6TH MAIN,
MALLESHWARAM,
BANGALORE-560 003.
REPRESENTED BY ITS PROPRIETOR OF
S.HEMAVATHI.
…COMPLAINANT
(BY SRI. GIRI KUMAR.S.V., ADVOCATE)
AND:
1.
SRI.RITVIK RANJANAM PANDEY
PRINCIPAL SECRETARY,
DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND FAMILY WELFARE, VIKASA SOUDHA, BENGALURU-560 001.
2.
SRI. GURUDATTA HEGDE,
THE COMMISSIONER,
COMMISSIONERATE OF HEALTH AND FAMILY
WELFARE SERVICES-AROGYA SOUDHA,
MAGADI ROAD, BENGALURU-560 023.
3.
SRI.VASANTH KUMAR.K
DIRECTOR,
DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND FAMILY WELFARE, SERVICES, GOVERNMENT OF KARNATAKA, AROGYA SOUDHA, MAGADI ROAD,
Digitally signed by
SUMATHY
KANNAN
Location: HIGH
COURT OF
KARNATAKA
HC-KAR
BENGALURU-560 023.
4.
SRI PRABHU GOWDA,
DEPUTY DIRECTOR,
AROGYA KAVACH 108
AND AROGYA SAHAYA VANI-104,
DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND FAMILY WELFARE
SERVICES, AROGYA SOUDHA, MAGADI ROAD,
BENGALURU-560 023.
…ACCUSED
5.
THE STATE OF KARNATAKA
REPRESENTED BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY,
DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND
FAMILY WELFARE SERVICES,
VIKASA SOUDHA, BENGALURU-560 001.
…PROFORMA R5
(BY SMT. B.SUKANYA BALIGA., AGA FOR PROFORMA R5, A1-A4)
THIS CCC IS FILED UNDER SECTIONS 11 AND 12 OF THE
CONTEMPT OF COURT ACT, 1971 R/W ARTICLE 215 OF THE
CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, BY THE COMPLAINANT, PRAYING
THAT
THE
HON’BLE
COURT
BE
PLEASED
TO
TAKE
COGNIZANCE/TRY THE CASE UNDER SECTION 11 AND TO
PUNISH THE ACCUSED UNDER SECTION 12 OF THE CONTEMPT
OF COURTS ACT, 1971, SINCE THE ILLEGAL INACTION OF
ACCUSED
VIDE
FINAL
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
ORDER
DATED 10.11.2025 IN W.P.NO.31027/2025 (GN-RES) OF THIS HON'BLE COURT AMOUNT TO CONTEMPT OF COURT, HENCE THE SAME IS PRAYED TO CONSIDER THE PETITION.
THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JAYANT BANERJI & HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE TARA VITASTA GANJU
HC-KAR
ORAL ORDER
(PER: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JAYANT BANERJI)
Willful disobedience of the order dated 10.11.2025 in Writ Petition No.31027/2025 is alleged.
2. By the order of the writ court, a mandamus was issued directing the respondents to consider the representations at Annexures “A”, “B” and “C” in the writ petition and pass necessary orders. The court had made it clear that it had not expressed any opinion on the entitlement for payment of the petitioner.
3. In the compliance affidavit filed today by Dr. Prabhudev B. Gowda, the Deputy Director, EMS, Health and Family Welfare Services, an endorsement issued to the complainant on 02.12.2025 is enclosed, which reflects that a Commission headed by a retired Judge of the High Court was constituted in respect of vehicles and ambulances hired on rental basis during Covid-19 pandemic, and the files relating to the said activities were
HC-KAR
submitted before the Commission. After detailed examination, an audit/verification of accounts was recommended. As per the recommendation of the Commission, an amount of Rs.1,32,000/- already paid as grant, is liable to be recovered / refunded. It has been informed that no further grant / payment or pending bill amount is payable to the complainant firm. It has further been informed that since the inquiry in the matter is still pending, necessary further action would be taken after completion of the inquiry.
4. In our opinion, the order of the writ court has been complied with. The contempt case is consigned.
Sd/- (JAYANT BANERJI) JUDGE
Sd/- (TARA VITASTA GANJU) JUDGE
KS List No.: 1 Sl No.: 9