Amitava Lala, J.@mdashThis application for contempt has been made with a supporting affidavit dated 1.4.99 while the original order was passed on 16.4.97 by giving a direction under the interim order upon the petitioner to appear before the Selection Committee on 17.4.97 or on any subsequent date. Writ petition is still pending. It is clear that the contempt application is hit by Section 20 of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 which speaks no contempt proceeding will be initiated after a period of one year from the date of alleged violation to have been committed. Hence, the question arose before this court that at this belated stage in April, 2001, is it practicable to take cognizance of the matter for the purpose of issuance of Rule. In a recent judgment reported in
"The power of the Supreme Court and the High Court being the Courts of Record as embodied under Articles 129 and 215 respectively cannot be restricted and trammeled by any ordinary legislation including the provisions of the Contempt of Courts Act. Their inherent power is elastic unfettered and not subjected to any limit. The power conferred upon the Supreme Court and the High Court, being Courts of Record under Articles 129 and 215 of the Constitution respectively is an inherent power and the jurisdiction vested is a special one not derived from any other statute but derived only from Articles 129 and 215 of the Constitution of India and therefore the constitutionally vested right cannot be either abridged by any legislation or abrogated or cut down. Nor can they be controlled or limited by any statute or by provision of the Code of Criminal Procedure or any Rules. The caution that has to be observed in exercising the inherent power by summary procedure is that the power should be used sparingly, that the procedure to be followed should be fair and that the contemner should be made aware of the charge against him and given a reasonable opportunity to defend himself."
Therefore, there are two parts for consideration. One is in respect of the applicability of Article 215 of the Constitution of India by the High Court and other is applicability of Section 20 of the Contempt of the Courts Act. This Court in delivering judgment already held that the power by Article 215 as given to the High Court cannot be curtailed. High Court will proceed in its own wisdom in respect of the contempt matter in view of the Article 215 of the Constitution of India. Article 215 of the Constitution of India speaks every High Court shall be a Court of record and shall have all the powers of such a court including the power to punish for contempt, of itself.
2. By citing a Single Bench judgment of this court reported in 1996 (2) CLJ 349 (Begimkadar High School vs. Samarendra Bandapadhya & Ors.). Learned Counsel appearing for the petitioner contended that in view of Article.215 of the Constitution of India power of the High Court cannot be curtailed by the Parliament by introduction of Section 20 of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971.
3. This Court has already held in 2001 (1) CHN 347 (supra) that Section 20 of the Contempt of Courts Act cannot limit the proceeding before the court which has been initiated within the prescribed period but pending beyond the period. Similarly Section 20 of the Act cannot limit what would be the modus operandi in taking cognizance. These are the true import of the section. Section 20 is procedural in nature and prescribes limitation to remove uncertainty and to eliminate the stale complaints.
4. Promptness is the essence of the Contempt proceeding which was felt necessary and joint select committee of Parliament suggested to introduce period of limitation which was done accordingly by Parliament.
5. There are various modes of justice in the writ jurisdiction. Broadly it can be segregated in four categories. Firstly, a mandatory order or order for consideration giving time frame; Secondly, similar types of orders without time frame; Thirdly, by passing various interim orders to keep balance in between the parties either for a limited period or till the disposal of the writ petition; Fourthly, dismissal of writ petition or passing any non-contemptuous order.
6. So far fourth category is concerned, there is hardly any scope of contempt. So far the third category is concerned the same can be dealt with by the writ court by interlocutory process. So far first category is concerned, there is no difficulty to take out any contempt proceeding within one year time from the alleged violation. Difficulty may arise in respect of the second category where there is no time given to comply with the same. But if the notice is brought to the court about alleged violation. High Court can take cognizance in its own way and such period will be construed as initiation of contempt proceeding. Therefore, Section 20 of the Act appears to be introduced to Supplement the Article 215 of the Constitution not to curtail the power of the superior judiciary which is otherwise available. It is to be remembered that contempt is a quasi criminal proceeding not an alternative mode of equitable justice. Court has to look into the sanity of the Court. Any act or omission which undermines the dignity of the court In the process one can get the benefit of execution but it is not an alternative mode of execution alone.
7. According to my interpretation there is no second thought about the applicability of the inherent power of the High Court under Article 215 of the Constitution of India. But such power has to be used sparingly. It is obvious, otherwise Pandora''s Box will be opened and court will be flooded with litigations. It is also clear from Section 22 of the Act that the same is made in addition to, not in derogation of the provision of any other law relating to Contempt of Courts. Even in the paragraph 15 of such judgment reported in
8. Therefore, in the backdrop of the legal position this contempt application has to be dismissed since it is made out of time amongst other grounds for dismissal which are very relevant for the purpose of determination of the issue at the time of final hearing of the writ petition. Hence, the contempt application stands dismissed. There will be no order as to costs.
9. I make it clear that this order will not prejudice the petitioner in any manner whatsoever to raise any grievance at the time of final hearing of the writ petition or by making any appropriate interlocutory application in the said writ petition. Let the writ petition appear in the. appropriate list of hearing. Let an urgent xeroxed certified copy of this judgment if applied for, be given to the Learned Advocates for the parties within two weeks from the date of putting the requisites.
