IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI F.A. No. 233 of 2023 ----

Dipti Sharma… … Appellant Versus Gunjan Sharma … … Respondent -------

CORAM :HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SUJIT NARAYAN PRASAD HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ARUN KUMAR RAI ------

For the Appellant : Ms. Oishi Das, Advocate For the Respondent : ..

--------

Order No. 18 : Dated 8^th December, 2025

1. At the outset, reference has been made to order dated 24.11.2025 in particular paragraph 8, which requires modification wherein in second line in between the phrase of words ‘that there is ...” and ‘monitoring either by the Assistant Registrar or the Deputy Registrar’, the word ‘no’ is left out inadvertently due to typing mistake.

2. We have perused order dated 24.11.2025 in entirety. The spirit of the order is that there is no monitoring either by the Assistant Registrar or the Deputy Registrar being the in- charge of the concerned Section and that is the reason in paragraph 9 of the said order explanation has been sought from the Assistant Registrar and the Deputy Registrar of the concerned Section.

3. Considering the aforesaid inadvertence, the paragraph 8 of order dated 24.11.2025 is modified to the extent that in between the phrase of words ‘that there is ...” and ‘monitoring either by the Assistant Registrar or the Deputy Registrar’, the word ‘no’ is added and accordingly, the same shall be read as no ‘.... that there is monitoring either by the Assistant Registrar or the Deputy Registrar, being the in-charge of the concerned Section’.

4. The rest part of the order shall remain intact.

5. In pursuance to order dated 1^st December, 2025 passed by this Court, the learned Registrar General has submitted report.

6. We have perused the report submitted by learned Registrar General dated 06.12.2025, as also the explanation furnished by Dealing Assistant, Assistant Registrar and Deputy Registrar of the concerned section and gone through the Office Orders whereby works has been assigned to the Assistant Registrars and Deputy Registrar.

7. It is evident from the report so submitted by learned Registrar General wherein reference of Order No. 02 dated 28.02.2002, kept at flag A, has been made, under the caption ‘Rules of Business and Order of Allocation of Duties’, whereby the Assistant Registrar-I (Judicial) has been assigned with the duty of In-charge of all the Civil Judicial Sections including First Appeal Section and is responsible for reading each and every order/judgment passed by this Court and taking steps for their compliance.

8. Similarly, the Deputy Registrar-I has jurisdiction over L.P.A. and First Appeal and related (Civil) Judicial Matters and is responsible for overall monitoring of work at all stages. Further, Notices dated 29.11.2017 and 01.12.2017 [kept at flag-D and E] have been referred, wherein it has been directed that all judicial (civil) and criminal matters requiring compliance shall be routed through the Assistant Registrar (Judicial)-I.

9. In addition, Standing Order.02/Accts. dated 21.09.2022 [kept at flag-F] has been issued directing that all the file movements, listing, inter-sectional records movement and compliance-related work must be undertaken under the supervision and upon endorsement of the Assistant Registrar/Assistant Registrar (In-Charge), who must ensure that no delay occurs in compliance of any order/direction of Hon’ble Court. It further mandates that any non-compliance by staff must be immediately reported to the higher authority. 10. Further, Office Order No. 40/Appt. dated 29.07.2024 [kept at flag-G], requires all Deputy Registrars [Non-Judicial] to visit their Sections daily, supervise work continuously, ensure zero pendency, check attendance of staff, and ensure timely compliance of all judicial orders within time.

11. Thus, it is evident that all the mechanism has been provided by the administrative decision taken by this Court but even then as per issue of the present case wherein 11 days has been caused in delaying the notice under Order V Rule 20. Then