Speaker P T R Palanivel Rajan informed the House that the division bench comprising Justices T Jayarama Chouta and S Thangaraj had initiated contempt proceedings against the jail officer, though press reports had suggested that the court had declined to entertain the contempt petition citing the compliance of its second bail order. "This is contrary to the initial newspaper reports that the High Court did not want to entertain the contempt petition," he said.

The jail superintendent and the high court registrar, however, said they had no knowledge about the outcome of the contempt application.

The jail authorities did not not releaseTamaraikani when the court granted him bail on March 23 stating that the order was served to them only at 8.15 pm and releasing a detenue after 6 pm was against the jail manual.

When this was reported to the High Court bench the next day, it passed a fresh bail order based on which the AIADMK member was released, only to be re-arrested on the orders of the Assembly speaker that day.

The bench, however, declined to entertain the contempt application pointing out that the court order had been complied with.

The bench passed the bail order for the third time yesterday after suspending the Assembly resolution sentencing Tamaraikani to 15 days' imprisonment. This time, the Assembly chose not to confront the judiciary.Meanwhile, the tussle between the Tamil Nadu Assembly and the Madras High Court has assumed national significance, with Lok Sabha Speaker G M C Balayogi agreeing to Palanivel Rajan's suggestion for a conference of all presiding officers in the first week of April to discuss theissue.Palanivelrajan told the State Assembly that he had contacted Balayogi and apprised him of the developments. Offering to convene a presiding officers' meeting, Balayogi had also told him a delegation of speakers could call on the President, if the need arose, to seek his intervention.

The Speaker told reporters that he would discuss the issue with Balayogi, who will be here tomorrow on a private visit.

He said presiding officers from other states had got in touch with him to express concern over the developments. They told him that it was not a matter concerning Tamil Nadu alone, but had implications for democracy.However, he reiterated that he (the Speaker) and Assembly Secretary D Solomon Jeya Paul would not receive the notice to be served by the High Court. Asked whether the notice had reached him, he said: ``I have not received it''.

As far as Chief Secretary A P Muthusami -- the first respondent in the habeas corpus petition -- is concerned, he said the State Government might engage a lawyerto represent him.

Asked if it meant that the Chief Secretary would accept the court notice, he said: ``I am not sure whether the Government would accept it or not''.Meanwhile, Paul today left for New Delhi along with State Law Secretary R Parthasarathy to hold discussions with LS Secretary-General S Gopalan and Union Law Secretary V K Agarwal on what action should be taken in view of the Assembly-Judiciary imbroglio.

]Sources said they would also try and help the Chief Secretary engage a constitutional expert in New Delhi for appearing in the Tamaraikani case, posted for March 30 in the Madras High Court. Both of them are expected to be back in Chennai tomorrow.