THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY Contempt Case No.297 of 2010 Dated 11th March, 2011 Between: V.Rama Rao and others …Petitioners And The Director/Commissioner, Department of Tribal Welfare, Masab Tank, Hyderabad and others …Respondents Counsel for the petitioners: Sri Karri Suryanarayana Counsel for respondents: GP for Social Welfare The Court made the following: ORDER: This contempt case is filed alleging wilful disobedience of order, dated 29.04.2009, in W.P.No.9139 of 2009. The said writ petition was filed for a mandamus to declare the action of respondent Nos.1 and 2 therein in not continuing the petitioners as Grade-II Telugu and Hindi pundits as illegal and arbitrary. The petitioners sought for a further direction to the respondents therein to permit them to work as Grade-II Telugu and Hindi pundits in the said vacancies. This Court while disposing of the said writ petition observed that it is not the pleaded case of the petitioners that they have a right to continue under any of the Service Regulations or the Scheme framed by the respondents and that if their term of contract expired, the respondents have a right to terminate their services. This Court, however, further observed that the respondents cannot replace one set of contract appointees with another set, unless their performance is found unsatisfactory. On that premise, it was directed that till such time as the vacancies are filled up on regular basis, the respondents shall consider engaging the services of the petitioners purely on ad hoc or contract basis, if their performance during the previous period was found satisfactory. Alleging that the respondents have committed wilful violation of the above direction given by this Court by issuing notification, dated 28.10.2009, calling for applications for appointment for school assistants, language pundits and physical trainee teachers on contract basis from ST candidates only, this contempt case is filed. Respondent No.3-Deputy Director, Tribal Welfare Department, Parvathipuram, Vizianagaram, filed counter affidavit and also an additional counter affidavit. In the additional counter affidavit filed by him, it is inter alia stated that he has joined as Deputy Director of Tribal Welfare, Parvathipuram on 22.02.2009 and respondent No.2 as Project Officer, ITDA, Parvathipuram on 25.02.2010, that they have noticed that notification, dated 28.10.2009, issued by the Project Officer, ITDA to recruit teachers on contract basis is contrary to the order of this Court, that therefore they have decided not to proceed further in pursuance of the said notification and that no appointment is made in furtherance thereof. Though the notification, dated 28.10.2009, is in violation of the order of this Court, having regard to the fact that respondent Nos.2 and 3 have purged the contempt, if any, committed in issuing the notification, I do not propose to proceed further in the contempt case. Accordingly, the contempt case is closed by placing on record the above-noted statement of respondent Nos.2 and 3 contained in the additional counter affidavit. C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY, J 11th March, 2011 VGB