The Supreme Court on Thursday sought replies from the registrar, additional registrar and other officials of the registry, to explain as to why a matter was not listed for a year, though it was ready for hearing [R Subramanian v UOI].

Pursuant to direction by the top court on November 1, a report dated November 2 under signature of concerned registrar was placed before the bench today.

In light of the report submitted, a bench of Chief Justice of India UU Lalit and Justice Bela M Trivedi found it reasonable to seek explanation from listing authorities as to why there was such a lapse and, therefore, directed them to file a reply by November 12.

"The report makes a reference to certain acts of some of the officials. Before we take any view in the matter. In fitness of things, the concerned persons must have opportunity to place their explanation before us. We thus direct, the then Learned Registrar J 2 , Additional Registrar and official of listing department to file reply by Saturday."

The Court further directed them to send copies of previous order along with today's order as well as the reply of registrar to the officials mentioned in the report.

"The concerned official shall also have a facility of inspection of the documents appended to the report of the registrars," the Court added.

The Court clarified that, explanation would filed on or before Saturday and matter to be heard next on November 7.

"The report of the registrar be re-sealed and the sealed cover report be again placed before us on Monday," the Court directed.

On November 1, while hearing the plea, the Court had directed to issue notice to the registry to give explanation as to why the matter was not listed for a year and a half even though it was ready.

The Court had also sought details of similar cases that were not listed during this period along with the remedial steps taken, if any.

[Read order]