AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
It appears that on 07.12.2017, office was directed to send express reminder through ''FAX'' to the Judge-in- Charge, Ramgarh, Hazaribagh
and Bokaro for transmission of the service reports of notices, which were received from the learned Assistant Registrar, Supreme Court of India,
New Delhi addressed to Registrar of this Court on 24.08.2017, whereby notices on respondent nos. 2 to 20 were directed to be served, as
respondent no. 1 has appeared through his counsel before the Hon''ble Supreme Court of India.
Office note dated 03.01.2018 reveals that Certificate regarding service of notices upon respondent nos. 2 to 20 in Civil Appeal No. 10811 of
2017 (filed against the order dated 03.02.2017 passed by this Court) have been forwarded to Hon''ble Supreme Court of India vide Memo No.
3076A dated 04.12.2017 and Memo No. 2283 dated 13.12.2017 kept at Flag- ""A1"" & ""A2"" respectively.
Letter bearing No. 3078A dated 04.12.2017 kept at Flag-""A1"" issued under the signature of Assistant Registrar, High Court of Jharkhand
addressed to Assistant Registrar, Supreme Court of India reveals that notices have been served on respondent nos. 12, 13, 15, 17 & 20 on
28.11.2017, 23.11.2017, 25.11.2017, 24.11.2017, 30.11.2017 respectively. So far the notice issued on respondent no. 9 is concerned, it is
mentioned that notice has been served under the provisions of Rule 17 of C.P.C., as per the report of Judge-in-Charge, Chatra. Notice on
respondent no. 10 has been received by his wife. Notice on respondent no. 04 has been received by his son.
Letter bearing No. 2283 dated 13.12.2017, kept at Flag- ""A2"" issued under the signature of Assistant Registrar, High Court of Jharkhand
addressed to Assistant Registrar, Supreme Court of India reveals that in terms of reminder of the Hon''ble Supreme Court dated 22.11.2017,
Certificate regarding service of notice of lodgment of petition of appeal in the matter mentioned above with respect to respondent nos. 4, 9, 10,
12, 13, 15, 17 & 20 was sent by this Court to the Hon''ble Supreme Court of India vide memo no. 3076A dated 04.12.2017. Reminders were
issued to Judge-in-Charge, Ramgrah, Hazaribagh, Bokaro Judgeships for proper service reports through speed post and FAX whereupon service
reports of rest of the respondents were received.
Revised service report of respondent no. 10 was received. It has been mentioned that notices have been validly served on respondents as per
report of Judge-in- Charge of the respective Judgeships except respondent no. 3 Manoj Kumar Sinha which has been returned unserved as he
could not be found on the address mentioned as per report of Registrar, Civil Courts, Hazaribagh.
It appears that in the letter dated 04.12.2017, which was sent by Assistant Registrar, High Court of Jharkhand, so far notice on respondent no.
9 is concerned, the Order of C.P.C. under which notices are deemed to be served as per report of the Judge-in-Charge, Chatra is not mentioned
and only Rule of C.P.C. is mentioned.
Call for an explanation from the concerned Assistant Registrar as to whether before writing letter, he has verified the relevant provisions of law
including the Order and Rule of C.P.C. and then he has sent the letter to the Hon''ble Supreme Court as it appears from perusal of C.P.C. that
Order V Rule 17 deals with the procedure when defendant refuses to accept service, or cannot be found.
Explanation must be received before 11.01.2018.
Further, I.A. No. 7974/2017 has been filed on behalf of the petitioner under Order 86 Rule 7 of the Representation of People Act, 1951
seeking compliance of the interim order dated 03.02.2017.
A counter affidavit in the aforesaid I.A. has been filed by Monika Rani Tuti, who is the Returning Officer, in which at para-7, it has been stated
that in the record list of 5,816 voters, whose name has been registered at two different places in same or at two booths in same constituency. If the
verification of the entire said records is done then 6-8 months will be required with assistance of atleast 50 staffs daily.
Learned counsel for the petitioner is directed to give categorical reply to the averments made in para-5, 6, 7, 8 of affidavit filed in I.A. No.
7974/2017 and, if so advised, may file rejoinder.
List this case on 11.01.2018.