New Delhi: The Supreme Court on Wednesday directed its officials who were named in a sealed-cover report of the Registrars to file their written explanations as to why a case, ready for hearing, was not listed before a bench for more than one-and-a-half years.
A bench comprising Chief Justice Uday Umesh Lalit and Justice Bela M Trivedi, which had issued the notice to the apex court registry on November 1 over non-listing of the case, perused the report and decided to give an opportunity to the officials, named in it, to explain their version by November 5.
"Pursuant to the directions issued by this Court in its order dated November 1, a report dated November 2, 2022 under the signatures of the concerned Registrars has been placed before us. The report makes a reference to decisions of some of the officials, it said. "Before we take any view in the matter, in the fitness of things, the concerned officials must have an opportunity to place their explanation before us, it said.
It then directed that the then Registrar J-II, Additional Registrar, In-charge of Sections 1B and the Listing Department may file their response on or before Saturday. In order to facilitate the response, the Registry shall send to the officials concerned copies of the court orders along with the report submitted by the Registrars, it said.
"The concerned officials shall also have the facility of inspection of all the documents appended to the report of the Registrars. The explanation shall be filed on or before November 5. List the matter for consideration on November 7, it ordered. The CJI-led bench also said that the report given by the Registry, after giving copies to the officials concerned, be re-sealed.
Earlier, the bench had expressed its strong displeasure over non-listing of a case for more than one-and-a-half years even though it was ready for hearing by a bench. The bench was hearing a petition of one R Subramanian challenging the validity of a provision of the Contempt of Court Act, 1971 and the sanction granted to try him for the contempt.
The top court, which permitted Subramanian to withdraw the plea, had noted in the order that the instant petition was filed on August 4, 2021 and was ready to be listed. "It was never listed before this Court on any occasion till October 21, 2022. On that date, a prayer was made on behalf of the petitioner seeking liberty to withdraw the instant petition, in view of certain developments which had occurred since the filing of the petition, it had said.
"However, one feature of the matter which has come to our notice requires immediate attention that the case which was ready to be listed was not listed for more than one-and-a-half years," it had said. To a pointed query whether the factum of pendency of the writ petition was utilised in any manner to have the pending contempt petition adjourned before the high court, Subramanian had told the bench that no such attempt at any juncture was made on his behalf.
"However, we issue notice to the Registry to file an explanation why the matter was not listed before the Court in a year and a half despite it had been Ready' to be listed. The Registry should also indicate whether any similar matters which were marked as Ready' but were not listed before the Court, it had ordered.
All the details pertaining to such matters shall be furnished along with an explanation and if any remedial steps have since then been taken those steps must also be adverted to. Let the explanation be furnished on or before November 03, it had said. (PTI)
(This story has not been edited by ETV Bharat and is auto-generated from a syndicated feed.)
