Impeachment and Removal : The Constitutional Way

This is to make a clarification of difference between the impeachment and removal as a matter of procedure.This is a classical example where our media is interpreting subjects according to their on convenience.If such a subject is our constitution what it amounts to, do not forget legal experts are also having a dual stand in this regard.But here it is my attempt to read it, conforming to the constitutional way.For example, as pointed out in the news item on Justice. Dinakaran's issue ('The Hindu'on Tuesday, 08 / 12 / 2009, front page, bottom right corner) that it is going to be an address be presented to the President seeking the removal of the tainted judge.The paragraph beginning with quoting the motion prepared by advocate Vaigi of FJA the matter is clearly stated, but in many places starting from the title of the news item it is wrongly stated as 'impeachment' including a part of the letter by Prashant Bhushan to leaders of various political parties.To make it clear I would like to refer the articles mentioned here as artilce.124.of Indian Constitution to be titled as 'Establishment and Constitution of Supreme Court' and article 217.as 'Appointment and Conditions of the office of a Judge of High Court'.Moreover quoting a legal expert in this matter, Subhash Kashyap clarifies the matter as..... "Contrary to the common belief, there is no provisions in our constitution for the impeachment of a judge.The impeachment is provided for the President and none else.Also, there is a fundamental difference between removal procedure and impeachment procedure and between the passing of a motion for presenting an address to the President seeking orders for the removal of a judge.The ground for the impeachment of the President have to concern violation of the 'Constitution' while an address for removal of a judge has to be on the ground of 'misbehavior or incapacity' ".