Radhakrishnan, Ag.C.J.

This contempt case was preferred under Article 215 of the Constitution of India and section 12 of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971. Registry did not number the case since no consent of the Advocate General as provided under section 15 of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 was obtained for filing the contempt case. On a request made by the counsel this matter has been posted before us for orders. In paragraph 9 of the contempt case it is stated that the petitioner has not obtained the consent of the Advocate General as envisaged under Section 15 of the Contempt of Courts Act, since it may delay the matter and the respondents are continuing with the process of scandalizing this court and the situation warrants immediate interference. Further, counsel also submitted that even if no consent was obtained from the Advocate General this court under Article 215 of the Constitution of India have got sufficient powers to initiate contempt of court proceedings against the respondents for scandalizing this Hon'ble Court and to punish them under the provisions of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 in the interest of justice. Counsel submitted that the conduct of th