Pradeep Kumar Singh Vs. the State of Jharkhand and ors.

.....record including the power to punish for its contempt. this special jurisdiction is inherent in a court of record from the very nature of the court itself. the said special power is not subject to the procedural law either of the criminal procedure code or the contempt of courts act. the high court can deal with the matter summarily and can adopt its own procedure. however, if the high court initiates the proceeding as a court of record, principle of natural justice must be applied and the contemner should be given sufficient opportunity to know the accusation and to defend himself. in the instant case, the contemner was served with the notice to show cause. he was well aware of the accusation. he also admitted his guilt. in view thereof, contention of the contemner lawyer that he was not heard on merit of the contempt application and the impugned judgment of punishing petitioner in contempt of court is violative of principles of natural justice, is not tenable. article 215: contempt proceedings review of conviction held, it is the solemn duty of the bench and bar to maintain and uphold the majesty, authority and dignity of the courts for the sustenance and progress of democracy in our country particularly at the juncture when there are number of instances of outside attempt to disintegrate and destroy the democratic set up of our country. such conduct of a member of the bar brings the authority of the court and the administration of justice into disrespect, erodes and undermine the foundation of the judiciary by shaking faith and confidence of the people in the ability of the courts to deliver free and fair justice, it is a deliberate attempt to insult the high court and denigrate the authority and solemnity and court strongly deprecate such attempt made with biased attitude. such indiscriminate allegations against judges, who are the members of the bench, cannot be a ground for review of the impugned judgment. punishment of prohibiting appearance of..........of jharkhand, ranchi refusing to approve petitioner's appointment on the ground that he was not appointed after following the due procedure.3. in my opinion, at best it can be said to be a case of irregularity and not illegality and therefore, petitioner's case for approval of his appointment requires reconsideration.4. in the circumstances, the impugned order dated 11.2.2008 is set aside and the matter is remitted back to the director, secondary education, government of jharkhand, ranchi (respondent no. 3) to reconsider the matter of approval of the services of petitioner. he will call for the relevant records from the managing committee of the school and the district education officer. after looking into the records, he will pass a reasoned order in accordance with law as early as possible and preferably within a period of two months from the date of receipt/production of a copy of this order.5. if the appointment of the petitioner is approved, he will also pass order with regard to payment of arrears/current salary for the period he actually worked, which will be paid to the petitioner as early as possible and preferably within a period of four weeks thereafter.6. with these observations and directions, this writ petition is disposed of.