JUDGMENT :

Vikas Budhwar, J.

1. This intra-court appeal is against the judgment and order dated 17.03.2023 passed by the learned Single Judge exercising contempt jurisdiction in Contempt Application (Civil) No.1894 of 2023, by which the learned Single Judge upon finding that the opposite party has not committed contempt, has declined to initiate proceedings for contempt.

2. The case of the writ petitioner before the Contempt Court was that on 07.09.2022 in Public Interest Litigation (PIL) No. 1686 of 2022 (Vinod Kumar Gupta and others vs. State of U.P. and 3 others), liberty was accorded to the appellant-petitioner to approach the appropriate forum under Section 67 of the U.P. Revenue Code, 2006 for removal of encroachments on the public land, however, despite the fact that the appellant-writ petitioner represented his cause before the competent authority on 21.09.2022, 01.10.2022 and 15.02.2023, no action was taken at the level of the opposite parties, which occasioned the appellant-writ petitioner to institute contempt petition alleging disobedience of the orders of the Writ-Court.

3. Submission is that a clear cut case of contempt is made out against the opposite parties, but the learned Single Judge has erred in law in decling to exercise its jurisdiction vested under Section 12 of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971.

4. The appellant-writ petitioner has relied upon the judgment in the case of Durga Nagpal Vs. Committee of Management, Patronage Institute of Management Studies, reported in 2013 (7) ADJ 223, so as to contend that the present intra-court appeal against the order of learned Single Judge declining to initiate contempt proceedings, is maintainable.

5. Before delving into the issue regarding the maintainability of the present proceedings at the behest of the appellant, this Court finds appropriate to give a brief outline of the statutory enactments governing law of contempt.

6. Historically, Pre-Independence, the Contempt of Courts Act, 1926 (Act No. XII of 1926), was notified on 8.3.1926 by the Governor General of the Council. The Contempt of Courts Act, 1926 is extracted in extenso:

"The Contempt of Courts Act, 1926

ACT NO. XII OF 1926

[8th March, 1926]

An Act to define and limit the powers of certain Courts in punishing contempts of Courts.

WHEREAS doubts have arisen as to the powers of a High Court of Judicature to punish contempts of subordinate Courts: And whereas it is expedient to resolve these doubts and to define and limit the powers exercisable by High Courts and Chief Courts in punishing contempts of Courts. It is hereby enacted as follows:

1. (1) This Act may be called the Contempt of Courts Act, 1926.

(2) It shall extend to the whole of British India.

(3) It shall come into force on such date as the Governor General in Council may, by notification in the Gazette of India, appoint.

2. (1) Subject to the provisions of sub-section (3), the High Courts of Judicature established by Letters Patent shall have and exercise the same jurisdiction, powers and authority, in accordance with the same procedure and practice, in respect of contempt of courts sub-ordinate to them as they have and exercise in respect of contempts of themselves.

(2) Subject to the provisions of sub-section (3), a Chief Court shall have and exercise the same jurisdiction, powers and authority, in accordance with the same procedure and practice, in respect of contempt of itself as a High Court referred to in sub-section (1).

(3) No High Court shall take cognizance of a contempt alleged to have been committed in respect of a Court subordinate to it where such contempt is an offence punishable under the Indian Penal Code.

3. Save as otherwise expressly provided by any law for the time being in force, a contempt of court may be punished with simple imprisonment for a term which may extend to six months, or with fine, which may extend to two thousand rupees, or with both:

Provided that the accused may be discharged or the punishment awarded may be remitted on apo