The High Court's plenary powers under Article 226 must not contravene statutory provisions, and the imposition of penalties must adhere to procedural norms.

JUDGMENT :

Harish Tandon, J.

MAT 913 OF 2021

1. A piquant situation has arisen in the instant appeal as to whether the High Court in exercise of power under Article 226 of the Constitution of India can usurp the power conferred upon the statutory authority in inflicting the penalty on a perceived misconduct.

2. The impugned order is not challenged in its entirety at the behest of the appellant but is restricted to a portion of the order by which the headmaster of the school has been found wholly unfit to act, discharge his duties in such capacities and has been robbed off all such powers in exercise of the plenary jurisdiction assumed to have reserved in the Writ Court.

3. Even after sermonising the act and the conduct of the headmistress, the Writ Court has demoted her to the post of the assistant teacher and prevented her to act in the capacity of the headmistress in the said school. The aforesaid observation of the Single Bench raises a serious concern over the jurisdiction, powers, plenary or otherwise, as well as the competence to issue the mandamus in such form and manner.

4. Mr. Anjan Kumar Bhattacharya, the Learned Advocate appearing for the appellant is very much critical on the aforesaid directions passed by the Single Bench in pursuit of securing justice by contending that the Writ Court cannot usurp the power of the statutory authority and impose the punishment which is neither contemplated in the statutory Rules nor otherwise. Mr. Bhattacharya further submits that the post of the headmaster/headmistress in an institution has a separate source of selection and the post of the Assistant Teacher is never regarded as a feeder post and, therefore, demotion to the post of the Assistant Teacher in exercise of so-called plenary jurisdiction is beyond the conceivable limits of the writ jurisdiction or the self-restrain imposed from time to time.

5. The aforesaid contentions have raised a vital and important point over the plenary powers/jurisdictions of the Writ Court in imposing the penalty not contemplated in the Statutory Rules or adopting a procedure unknown in the field of law. It is no doubt true that the High Court is invested with the powers to issue the writs of various natures not only in a case where the fundamental rights of a citizen is invaded but also against the denial or the infringement of the other legal rights. The distinction between the powers of the Supreme Court conferred under Article 32 of the Constitution of India is distinct with the powers of the High Court provided under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. In the later case, the power is void enough to engulf not only the case relating to the infringement of the fundamental rights but also the legal right but in former case it is only when the fundamental right is infringed and the Supreme Court assumed the jurisdiction and interfered with the action of the Government, semi Government and the authorities. The Supreme Court and the High Courts are the Courts of record and reserved power even to correct its record whenever the mistakes or the discrepancies are there and in this regard the court exercises the plenary jurisdiction.

6. The question is still begging an answer whether in exercise of plenary jurisdiction, the court can pass an order which is otherwise conferred upon the statutory authority and inflicted the punishment without observing and/or following the statutory procedures and the norms provided therefor. The edifice of the Constitution stand upon the equality, fraternity, respect for each other and the adherence of the principles of natural justice. Nobody shall be punished or condemned without affording an adequate opportunity to defend or a right of hearing.

7. Time and again, the Supreme Court as well as the High Court has imposed the self-restraint in exercise of the plenary jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India in not entertaining the writ petitions nor the order to be passed transgressing and/or abrogatin