ORDER
1. This Court by an order dated 31-1-1992 in W.P. M.P. No. 1176 of 1992 in W.P. No. 1037 of 1992 directed that the District Education Officer, Krishna, shall not pass any further orders in regard to the change in the Correspondentships of the Schools run and managed by Convenor, Education Committee, CBCNC, West Vuyyuru fields, pending further orders on the writ petition.
2. This contempt case has been filed on the allegation that contrary to the said direction, the District Educational Officer passed an order on 14-4-1992 approving the nomination of Correspondents made by the Convenor, Education Committee, CBCNC.
3. It has been brought to my notice by the learned Govt. Pleader for Education that subsequent to the order passed in W.P.M.P. No. 1176/92, some of the respondents in the said W.P.M.P. (respondents 2 and 3 in this contempt case) filed W.P. No. 4317 of 1992 and inn W.P.M.P. No. 5411 of 1992, this Court passed an interim order on 30-3-1992 directing the District Educational Officer to issue specific orders of approval of Correspondentships of the petitioners forthwith under section 24 of the A.P. Education Act read with A.P. Grants-in-aid Code, pending further orders on the the petition. Thus, the District Educational Officer was confronted with two directions from this Court contradicting each other. In those circumstances, if the respondent passed an order approving the nomination of Correspondents pursuant to the later order of this Court, it is difficult to say that the respondent had wilfully disobeyed the order of this Court.
4. Learned Counsel for the petitioners strenuously contends that the proper course for the respondents should have been to place the relevant facts before this Court by filing a counter and to move this Court for clarification in the matter. Learned Counsel further submits that this step has not been taken by the respondent only with a view to help the Convenor and the newly appointed Correspondents. Though the action taken by the District Educational Officer can be viewed with certain amount of suspicion, there is not clinching material before me to show that he was actuated by a motive to circumvent the order of this Court passed in W.P.M.P. No. 1176 of 1992 or that he was actuated by a mala fide intention to help the Convenor. Of course, if would have been proper, if he had asked for a clarification from this Court. But, merely on account of his failure to do so, it cannot be said that he has acted in deliberate defiance of the order of this Court. Hence, I am not inclined to take any any action against the respondent under The Contempt of Courts Act.
5. The facts of this case reveal a sorry state of affairs giving rise to the irresistible inference that one party is trying to outwit the other in trying to obtain ex parte orders from this Court to meet their convenience. First, respondents 2 and 3 herein, filed W.P. No. 16943 of 1991 impleading the official of the Education Department and the Convenor, Education Committee, CBCNC as parties, seeking for a direction to the District Educational Officer, Krishna to approve the correspondentships of the petitioners in West Vuyyuru field group of schools. This writ petition was disposed of at the admission stage on 27-12-91 with a direction to the District Educational Officer to dispose of the proposal sent by the Convenor on 17-10-1991 within two months from the date of receipt of the order. As the time stipulated by this Court for the disposal of the matter by the second respondent was coming to close, the petitioners herein filed W.P. No. 1037 of 1992 and W.P.M.P. No. 1176/92 and sought for a direction to the District Educational Officer, Krishna not to approve of any change in the correspondentships of the schools run and managed by the Convenor, Education Committee, CBCNC. Of course, in that writ petition, there is a reference to the order passed in W.P. No. 16943 of 1991. It is not known whether a copy of the order in W.P. No. 16943 of 1991 was placed before the learned Judge and whether he was otherwise apprised of the orders passed in W.P. No. 16943/91. Then it was the turn of respondents 2 and 3 to file W.P. No. 4317/92 – which was the second move in the agies without disclosing the factum of pendency of W.P. No. 1037/92 and the interim orders passed therein. The petitioners (respondents 2 and 3 in this Contempt case) sought for a direction to the District Educational Officer to approve the Correspondentships of the petitioners in respect of CBCNC Schools under Section 24 of the A.P. Education Act, as per the proposals sent by the Convenor, Education Committee by issuing specific orders. As already stated, an interim direction was granted by this Court in W.P.M.P. No. 5411 of 1992 on the terms mentioned above. It can be said that if the earlier order passed by this Court in W.P.M.P. No. 1176 of 1992 had been brought to the notice of the Court, the order in W.P.M.P. No. 5411/92 could not have been passed in the terms in which it was passed. Prima facie, it appears to me that the petitioners in W.P. No. 4317 of 1992 (respondents 2 and 3 herein) are guilty of suppression of material facts. The stream of justice has been sufficiently polluted by the litigants. But, in this Contempt Case arising out of W.P.M.P. No. 1176 of 1992 in W.P. No. 1037 of 1992 it is not appropriate to initiate any action against the respondents.
6. Learned Counsel for respondents 2 and 3 seeks time to file counter after the case has been heard and orders reserved. I do not think that at this belated stage I should permit them to file counter, especially when I am dropping action against them under the Contempt of Courts Act. However, if any proceedings are initiated against them in the other writ petition, viz., W.P. No. 4317/92 it is open to the respondents 2 and 3 to put forward their defence.
7. For the foregoing reasons, the Contempt Case is dismissed with the above directions. No order as to costs.
8. Order accordingly.