- (1.) HEARD the learned Advocates appearing for the parties.
(2.) IN view of the very nature of the stay application, we are of the view that the stay application and the appeal both could be heard analogously. Since all the parties are appearing, service of notice of appeal and other formalities stands dispensed with.
(3.) A preliminary point has been taken for maintainability of the appeal relying upon the judgment reported in AIR 1972 Cal. 449 (Full Bench decision ). By the impugned order under appeal, the learned trial Judge directed the District Inspector of School concerned to accord approval of the other four teaching staff. From the very nature of the order under appeal, we are of the view that the rights and liabilities of the parties wag determined by the said order on adding District Inspector of School In the contempt proceeding, not as the alleged contemnor, which otherwise was not permissible in a contempt proceeding. Though the appeal has been cropped up from the order passed in a contempt proceeding, we are of the view that the appeal is maintainable, in view of the settled law that statutory provision of appeal under Section 19 of the Contempt of Courts Act is applicable when punishment is imposed to the alleged contemnor but for other orders where there is no punishment imposed, intra-court appeal is permissible and maintainable. This legal position determined by the Apex Court in the case reported in 2006 (5) SCC 399 (Midnapore Peoples'co-op. Bank Ltd. and Ors. v. Chunilal Nanda and Ors. ). The relevant portion of Midnapore Peoples'co. op Bank Ltd. (supra) reads such:- "any direction issued or decision made by the High Court in contempt proceeding, on the merits of a dispute between the parties unless incidental to or inextricably connected with the order punishing for contempt held is not in exercise of jurisdiction to punish for contempt and, therefore, not appealable under Section 19 of the Contempt of Court Act. However, the said order can be challenged in intra-court appeal (if the order was of a Single Judge and there was a provision for intra-court appeal, namely, Clause 15 of Letters Patent and Ors.) or by SLP under Article 136 to the Supreme Court of India". ;