1

NON-REPORTABLE

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

INHERENT JURISDICTION

CONTEMPT PETITION(C) No(s). 834-847/2018 IN

SLP(C) No(s). 23757-23763/2016

ANWAR HUSENA BAMMANALI                             Petitioner(s)

                               VERSUS

UMA MAHADEVAN                                      Respondent(s)

IN THE MATTER OF:

ANWAR HUSENA BAMMANALI                             Petitioner(s)

                               VERSUS

THE STATE OF KARNATAKA & ORS.   Respondent(s)

J U D G M E N T

KURIAN, J.

(1) We have heard learned counsel for the parties.

(2) Pursuant to our order dated 6th July, 2018, Ms. Deepa

M.  Cholan,  Director,  Women  and  Child  Development

Department, Bengaluru, who as of now is discharging her

duty as Deputy Commissioner, Dharwad, is present in the

court in-person.  She has also filed an affidavit on 23rd

July, 2018 explaining the circumstances which led to the

instruction given to the standing counsel.

(3) Explanation offered in the said affidavit is accepted

2

and further proceedings in the contempt petitions against

Ms. Deepa M. Cholan are dropped.

(4) We  are  informed  that  vacancies  that  there  are  31

vacancies in the post of Superintendent Grade-I (Probation

Officer Grade-I).

(5) Having regard to the peculiar facts and circumstances

of this case, we are of the view that interest of justice

would be met and complete justice would be done in case

the petitioner is appointed against one of the available

vacancies since, as a matter of fact he stood selected

pursuant to Notification dated 18.01.2012 and only because

of non-availability of vacancies his case could not be

considered.

(6) Hence,  we  issue  a  direction  to  the  Government  of

Karnataka to appoint the petitioner forthwith against one

of  the  available  vacancies  as  Superintendent  Grade-I

(Probation Officer Grade-I).

(7) We  make  it  clear  that  this  order  is  made  in  the

peculiar  facts  of  the  present  case  and  shall  not  be

treated as a precedent.  To avoid any further dispute with

regard  to  the  future  seniority  of  the  petitioner,  we

clarify that the seniority of the petitioner will be only

3

from the date of his appointment.

(8) The contempt petitions are accordingly disposed of.  

...................J.              (KURIAN JOSEPH)  

.....................J.              (SANJAY KISHAN KAUL)     

NEW DELHI JULY 26, 2018