Over 2 lakh Indian cases. Search powered by Google!

Case Details

STATE versus JAGDISH PRASAD GOLYAN

High Court of Rajasthan

Case Law Search

Indian Supreme Court Cases / Judgements / Legislation

Judgement


STATE v JAGDISH PRASAD GOLYAN - CFA Case No. 17 of 1998 [2007] RD-RJ 3161 (4 July 2007)

S.B. Civil First Appeal No.17/1998

Date : 4.7.2007

HON'BLE MR. PRAKASH TATIA, J.

Ms.RR Kanwar, Addl.GA, for the appellant.

Ms.R Borana, for the respondents.

-----

This Court on 16.4.2004 observed that there is no report of the office whether the record of the court below has been received or not in pursuance of requisition dated 27.2.2004. By the same order, it was ordered that if the record has not been received, then explanation be sought from the Judge of the Court below why the record of the court below was not sent to this

Court.

On 24.4.2004, the office itself ordered for due compliance of the order of this Court dated 16.4.2004 but it appears from the record that the said order was not complied with for more than two years.

It is relevant to mention here that the file was very much dealt with on 24.4.2004 and thereafter on 19.8 (but without mentioning the year) by the concerned clerk and he did not comply with the order dated 16.4.2004 despite possessing the file.

On 26.8.2006, again the concerning clerk was directed to comply with the order immediately but he did not comply till 2.12.2006. When he was directed to comply again, then only, the copy of the order of this

Court was sent to the court below on 15.12.2006.

Why the registry itself did not took action against such type of working of High Court staff who did not comply the order of the Court dated 16.4.2004 for two years despite the fact that the file was very much available with the concerning clerk but he did not obey the court order as well as office orders. Why the registry is waiting for the orders of the Court always which are not desirable to be passed in judicial side.

Copy of this order be sent to the Registrar

General so that they may properly supervise the dealing of court files.

Since the record requisitioned has received, therefore, no further order is needed except direction to the Registrar General for taking action and taking the office in order.

(PRAKASH TATIA), J.

S.Phophaliya


Copyright

Reproduced in accordance with s52(q) of the Copyright Act 1957 (India) from judis.nic.in, indiacode.nic.in and other Indian High Court Websites

Advertisement

dwi Attorney | dui attorney | dwi | dui | austin attorney | san diego attorney | houston attorney | california attorney | washington attorney | minnesota attorney | dallas attorney | alaska attorney | los angeles attorney | dwi | dui | colorado attorney | new york attorney | new jersey attorney | san francisco attorney | seattle attorney | florida attorney | attorney | london lawyer | lawyer michigan | law firm |

Tip:
Double Click on any word for its dictionary meaning or to get reference material on it.