The Supreme Court Tuesday took a strong view of non-listing of a case before a bench for more than one-and-a-half years even though it was "ready" for listing and hearing, and sought an explanation from its own registry.
A bench of Chief Justice Uday Umesh Lalit and Justice Bela M Trivedi 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 Supreme Court Tuesday took a strong view of non-listing of a case before a bench for more than one-and-a-half years even though it was "ready" for listing and hearing, and sought an explanation from its own registry.
A bench of Chief Justice Uday Umesh Lalit and Justice Bela M Trivedi 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, 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 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 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 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 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 ordered.
-With PTI Input