Ashok Bhushan, Ag.C.J.

1. Heard learned counsel for the appellant. This Contempt Appeal has been filed against the judgment dated 02.06.2014 in Contempt Case (C) No.454 of 2014 by which the learned Single Judge has closed the contempt proceedings observing that no case has arisen for initiating contempt of court proceedings.

2. The Contempt Appeal has been filed by the appellant under Section 19 of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 as well as Section 5 of the Kerala High Court Act, 1958. An objection has been raised by learned counsel appearing for the respondent that this Contempt Appeal is not maintainable. Before we proceed to examine the issue and answer, it is necessary to note the nature of the order passed by the learned Single Judge in Contempt Case.

3. The contempt appeal was filed by the petitioner alleging non-compliance of the judgment dated 06.12.2013 in W.P.(C) No.37321 of 2010 filed by a Union and two workers. The Writ Petition was disposed of in terms of the out of court settlement. In the contempt proceedings it is alleged that the terms of settlement are not strictly or completely complied with. Learned Singe Judge did not proceed with the contempt proceedings and contempt proceedings was closed.

4. We have to consider Section 19 of the Contempt of Courts Act first, which provides as follows:

"19.Appeals.- (1) An appeal shall lie as of right from any order or decision of High Court in the exercise of its jurisdiction to punish for contempt

(a) where the order or decision is that of a Single Judge, to a Bench of not less than two Judges of the Court;

(b) where the order or decision is that of a Bench, to the Supreme Court:

provided that where the order or decision is that of the Court of the Judicial Commissioner in any Union Territory, such appeal shall lie to the Supreme Court.

(2) Pending any appeal, the Appellate Court may order that

(a) the execution of the punishment or order appealed against be suspended;

(b) if the appellant is in confinement, he be released on bail; and

(c) the appeal be heard notwithstanding that the appellant has not purged his contempt.

(3) Where any person aggrieved by any order against which an appeal may be filed satisfies the High Court that he intends to prefer an appeal, the High Court may also exercise all or any of the powers conferred by sub-section (2).

(4) An appeal under sub-section (1) shall be filed

(a) in the case of an appeal to a Bench of the High Court, within thirty days;

(b) in the case of an appeal to the Supreme Court, within sixty days from the date of the order appealed against."

5. The ambit and scope of Section 9 of the Contempt of Courts Act has come for consideration before the Apex Court as well as different High Courts from time to time. The first judgment which need to be noted is the three judge Bench judgment of the Apex Court reported in Baradakanta Mishra v. Mr.Justice Gatikrushna Misra, Chief Justice of the Orissa High Court, (1975) 3 SCC 535. In the said case the applicant moved before the Full Bench of High Court for initiating proceedings of contempt against the Chief Justice and other judges in their personal capacity. The Full Bench of the High Court vide its order dated 13.02.1973 held that no contempt of court is committed by the Chief Justice and other judges. Against the High Court judgment an appeal was filed by the applicant under Section 19 of the Contempt of Court before the Apex Court. A preliminary objection was raised before the Apex Court by the Additional Solicitor General that the appeal is not maintainable. It was contended that no appeal will lie under Section 19(1) against refusal of the High Court to initiate proceedings of contempt. The Apex Court in the said case has laid down in paragraphs 7 and 8 as follows:

"7. Before we examine the language of Section 19 sub- section (1) in order to arrive at its true interpretation, we may first look at Sections 15, 17 and 20. Sub-section (1) of Section 15 provides that in a case of criminal co