RAVI SARASWAT Vs. RAM CHANDRA MAHESHWARI AND ANR.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) In our opinion it was rightly held in the case of Kuldeep Narain v/s. Mahendra Lai Jain, 1984 A CrR 374:1984 AWC 653 that a person who moves the court for taking action for contempt of court has no right to file an appeal Under Sec. 19(1) of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 before a Division Bench against the order of a Single Judge dismissing his application. This appeal is accordingly not maintainable.

(2.) Let our opinion be placed before the appropriate Bench for orders.

(3.) Appellant Ravi Saraswat filed an application Under Sec. 12 of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 (hereinafter referred to as the Act) praying that Ram Chandra Maheshwari, Secretary, Board of High School and Intermediate Education, Allahabad opposite -party No. 1 and Radhey Shyam Tripathi, Principal, Government Inter College, Allahabad opposite -party No. 2 be punished for committing civil contempt by wilfully disobeying the order of this Court dated 9th August, 1984 passed in Writ Petition No. nil of 1984 Ravi Saraswat v/s. Board of High School and Intermediate Education U.P. through its Secretary. Notice was issued to opposite party No. 1 only and a charge was framed against him by a learned Single Judge on 23rd August, 1984. Opposite -party No. 1 thereafter filed his counter -affidavit and the learned Single Judge subsequently dismissed the application by his order dated Vth October, 1984 and discharged the notice issued to opposite -party No. 1. The Appellant thereafter filed this appeal Under Sec. 19(1) of the Act against the aforesaid order of the learned Single Judge dated 11th October, 1984 before a Division Bench. It was reported by the Stamp Reporter that the appeal Under Sec. 19(1) of the Act was not maintainable in view of the decision of this Court in Kuldeep Narain V. Mahendra Lai Jain (supra) in which it was held that an appeal Under Sec. 19(1) of the Act only lay against an order punishing a person for contempt of Court 4. Learned Counsel for the Appellant contended before the Division Bench that the view taken by this Court in the case of Kuldeep Narain v/s. Mahendra Lai Jain (supra) was erroneous and the Division Bench by its order dated 16th December, 1984 held that the decision in the case of Kuldeep Narain v/s. Mahendra Lai Jain (supra) requires reconsideration. That is how this appeal has come up before us and the question we are required to determine is whether it is maintainable Under Sec. 19(1) of the Act.