JUDGMENT 1. - This contempt petition has been filed for initiating contempt proceeding against the respondents for the alleged disobedience of orders of this Court in DBCWP No. 443/1987 and DBCWP No. 2027/1988. The directions therein were issueJ on 16.12.1987 and 19.12.1988 respectively. When attention of the counsel was drawn to Section 20 of the Contempt of Courts Act, he submitted that under Article 215 of the Constitution of India, there is no period of limitation and as such the petition cannot be said to be barred by limitation. 2. In Pallav Sheth v. Custodian and Others, (2001) 7 SCC 549 , a three-Judge Bench of Supreme Court has held that though the power to punish for contempt under Articles 129 & 215 of the Constitution of India cannot be abrogated or stultified by any provision of law, it must be exercised in consonance with validly enacted law and contempt of Courts Act being such a validly enacted legislation, the procedure provided. therein including Section 20 of the Act prescribing period of limitation for initiating contempt proceeding do not abrogate or stultify the power, and the limitation provisions, therefore, should be followed while exercising such power. The decision is direct answer to the contention of the counsel. 3. The petition is thus dismissed as time barred. 4. The dismissal of the petition, it goes without saying, will not prevent the appellant from filing a writ petition in respect of its grievance in accordance with law.Contempt petition dismissed and Barred by time Petitioner can otherwise file writ petition. *******