R. L. NARASIMHAM, C. J.

( 1 ) THIS is a proceeding for contempt started against the former Chief Minister of orissa, Sri Naba Krishna Choudhury in respect of a speech made by him in the orissa Legislative Assembly on 8-3-1956. An extract from the speech was published in a local daily known as 'matrubhumi' on 10-3-1956. The Editor and the printer and Publisher of the said daily were also called upon to show cause why they may not be committed for contempt, but they have both tendered an unqualified apology.

( 2 ) IN October 1953 a Division Bench of this Court, (Panigrahi C. J. and Mohapatra j) in an application under Article 226 of the Constitution filed by one of the zammdars of Ganjam district delivered judgment holding that the survey made in ganjam District was not authorised by law inasmuch as the proper notification under the Madras Survey and Boundaries Act of 1923 was not issued, and also gave consequential reliefs to the applicant. This judgment was reported in Mohan prasad Singh Deo v. State of Orissa, ILR (1953) Cut 725: (AIR 1954 Ori 97) (A ). On 18-12-1953 the State of Orissa applied for leave to appeal to the Supreme court, against the aforesaid decision, in S. C. A. 44 of 1953 and leave was granted on 2-2-1956. The appeal has not yet been heard by the Supreme Court. During the pendency of this appeal the then Chief Minister of Orissa Sri Nabakrishna Choudhury introduced a Bill in the Orissa Legislative Assembly entitled "the Ganjam and Koraput Survey, record of Rights and Settlement Operations (Validating) Bill 1956" with the primary object of validating all actions taken by survey officers in those two districts. He moved the Bill before the Legislature on 8-3-1956 and there ensued a discussion in which several Members of the Assembly participated. In the course of his speech, the Chief Minister stated that though the appeal to the supreme Court was pending, yet there was necessity for passing the validating bill. A member, named Sri Nishamoni Khuntia interrupted as follows :

"if we validate those actions which were declared by the High Court to be illegal, we will be accepting the position that those actions are illegal. Hence, where is the necessity of spending money by filing an appeal in the Supreme Court?" sri Nabakrishna Choudhury gave the following reply in Oriya. "i cannot say definitely. Even if we validate past actions yet in connection with what is likely to happen in future there may be necessity of going to the Supreme Court. At present our Constitution is new, the high Court is new. In many instances (Aneka kshetrate) the immaturity of the High Court is apparent. In many instances, the decision given by the High Court has been corrected by the Supreme Court. The Supreme court also held that in many instances the High Court has abused (apabyabahar) the powers given to it. "

( 3 ) ON the 16th March, 1956, one Surendra Mohanty who is a Member of parliament, filed a petition before this Court inviting its attention to the aforesaid passage and requesting the Court to initiate proceedings for contempt against the chief Minister, Sri N. K. Choudhury and the Editor, Printer and Publisher of 'matrubhumi'. There was a preliminary hearing as regards the jurisdiction of this court to initiate proceedings for contempt against the Chief Minister and after hearing the Advocate-General, a Bench of this Court decided on the 6th August 1956, to issue the notice. At the time of issuing notice, the Courts had before it only the uncorrected copy of the proceedings of the Orissa Legislative Assembly, supplied to it by the Secretary of the Assembly. At the time of the final hearing, however, the official 'report, of the proceedings was made available and Sir S. M. Bose, who appeared for the contemner very properly, did not challenge the correctness of the report.

( 4 ) SIR S. M. Bose urged the following three important points:

(i) The petitioner Sri Surendra Mohanty had no right to apply to this court for initiating c