1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR O R D E R S.B. CIVIL MISC. APPLICATION NO.42/2008 IN S.B.CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO.7306/2007 (Gaurav Pareek Vs. State & Ors.) Date of order : 8.5.2008 P R E S E N T HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE GOPAL KRISHAN VYAS Mr. S.K. Vyas, Govt. Advocate. In pursuance of the order passed by this Court on 30.4.2008, Dy. Registrar (Judicial) has furnished his explanation in which it is stated that with regard to communication dated 21.4.2008 sent by him under his signature he sought explanation of the concerned clerk Sh. Khet Singh and the concerning clerk has stated that the name of the Investigating Officer was not mentioned in the writ petition and in para no.10 of the writ petition, it is mentioned that the investigation was done in the supervision of Inspector General of Police, Jodhpur, therefore, the 2 said communication was sent to the Inspector General of Police, Jodhpur. Further, it is stated in the explanation by Dy. Registrar (Judicial) that letter/notice of explanation was prepared by the Office/concerned clerk and in routine and due to heavy and busy work, it was signed by him. In respect of mistake in drafting the notice, it is submitted that the concerned clerk has been directed to remain cautious and vigilant while performing duties. Further, it is stated in the explanation that now the Officer-in-charge has submitted the reply and that has been taken on record. Therefore, inconvenience caused to Hon'ble Court is highly regretted. After perusal of the record and more specifically the letter dated 21.4.2008 sent by Dy. Registrar (Judicial) to the Inspector General of Police, Jodhpur, I am unable to understand how this communication is sent by Dy. Registrar (Judicial) under his signature without any order of the Court while stating that “I am directed to request you to explain as to why investigation in F.I.R. No.40 dated 07/03/2007 police station Piparcity is not completed within 30 days as ordered by this Hon'ble Court on 11.2.2008.” The aforesaid assertion made by Dy. Registrar (Judicial) is totally wrong because no order was made by this Court to the Dy. Registrar (Judicial) to 3 request the Inspector General of Police, Jodhpur to file his explanation with regard to delay in investigation. When no order was passed by this Court for making any request to Inspector General of Police, Jodhpru then, it is the primary duty of Dy. Registrar (Judicial) to first read out the order of the Court carefully and then sign upon the letters at the time of sending any communication. It is also required to be observed that letters are required to be perused before signing by the Dy. Registrar (Judicial). The responsibility which lies upon the Dy. Registrar (Judicial) cannot be shifted upon the clerks of the Registry, Therefore, in my opinion, the assertion made in the explanation by the Dy. Registrar (Judicial) that he has sought explanation from the concerned clerk is totally baseless. Dy. Registrar (Judicial) himself was directed to explain why the notice was sent to Inspector General of Police, Jodhpur when the Court has not issued any such notice or made any request to Inspector General of Police, Jodhpur. Dy. Registrar (Judicial) while submitting explanation before the Court has tried to shift his responsibility upon the shoulders of the clerks of the Registry. A judicial officer, who is working on the post of Dy. Registrar (Judicial) is required to act in proper manner because post of Dy. Registrar (Judicial) is a post of responsibility in the judicial system of 4 the High Court. Therefore, explanation given by Dy. Registrar Judicial is not acceptable so far as it relates to shifting of his burden upon the clerk of Registry. In the above circumstances, I am of the view that for the mistake committed while signing the letter sent to Inspector General of Police, Jodhpur is a mistake committed by Dy. Registrar (Judicial) himself but in the explanation it is stated by him that due to heavy and busy work, the said letter was signed by him and he has stated in the explanation that inconvenience caused to High Court is highly regretted. Therefore, while taking lenient view, the explanation offered by Dy. Registrar (Judicial) for his own lapse is hereby accepted and he is directed to be careful and vigilant in future while issuing letters/notices to the authorities concerned. (GOPAL KRISHAN VYAS), J. arun