Punit Singh Vs. Jharkhand State Electricity Board 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..........as skilled khalashi in the office of the electric supply sub-division, chouparan, district-koderma. on the basis of wrong entry regarding his date of birth, he was illegally made to superannuate on 31st march, 1995. subsequently, in pursuance of an order, passed by the superior authority, after examination by the medical board, he was reinstated on 27th april, 1997 and later on, retired from the service of the jharkhand state electricity board (hereinafter to be referred as 'jseb') on 31st january, 2003.3. grievance of the petitioner is that he was not given second time bound promotion to which he was entitled and at the time of consideration, he was made to retire with effect from 31st march, 1995, although the cases of juniors were considered and they were granted the said benefit vide order dated 20th september, 1995 i.e., the period when the petitioner was forced to remain out of service. it is stated that the respondents have not paid the total post-retiral dues, such as, pension, leave encashment, group insurance etc., including arrears of salary on the basis of the revised pay scale.4. learned counsel for the jseb sought for some time to obtain instruction and file counter affidavit. however, as the matter requires determination by the respondents at the first instance, instead of giving any finding on the merit of the case, it is being disposed of at this stage. the petitioner is given liberty to approach the general manager-cum-chief engineer, jharkhand state electricity board, electric supply region, dhanbad, who will decide the question of time bound promotion of the petitioner and the matter relating to payment of post-retiral benefits, such as, pension, gratuity, leave encashment, gpf, group insurance, gss, including the arrears of salary, if any, on the basis of revised scale of pay. if the service book of the petitioner is traceless, in that case, the authority will try to reconstruct the duplicate service book and, if so required, may take help of.....