Writ maintainability against tribunal refusal to start contempt proceedings affirmed despite limited appeal remedy.

A writ petition under Articles 226 and 227 is maintainable against a statutory tribunal's refusal to initiate contempt proceedings. The tribunal, even when conferred contempt powers similar to those of the High Court, remains a creature of statute and does not acquire constitutional status equivalent to the High Court. The restriction on appeals under the Contempt of Courts Act does not bar writ scrutiny of such a refusal, and recourse under Article 136 is not the only remedy. Interference may still be declined by the High Court in appropriate cases on principles of propriety, constitutional scheme, self-restraint, or the facts of the case.

---

---

Issues: Whether a writ petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India is maintainable against an order of a statutory tribunal refusing to initiate contempt proceedings.

Analysis: The power of judicial review under Articles 226 and 227 cannot be excluded in respect of orders passed by inferior tribunals. The Tribunal, though vested by Section 15 of the West Bengal Land Reforms and Tenancy Tribunal Act, 1997 with contempt powers similar to those of the High Court, remains a statutory creature and does not acquire the constitutional status of the High Court. The limitation on appeals under Section 19 of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 does not bar writ scrutiny of a tribunal's refusal to initiate contempt proceedings. The view that the aggrieved person has only the remedy under Article 136 was held not to be correct.

Conclusion: A writ petition against the Tribunal's refusal to initiate contempt proceedings is maintainable, subject to the High Court's power to decline interference in appropriate cases on principles of propriety, constitutional scheme, self-restraint, or the facts of the case.

---