# administrative control, for their information and guidance

- **Citation:** C.L. No. 40
- **Court:** Allahabad High Court
- **Decided:** 1978-11-21
- **Case number:** C.L. No. 40
- **Source:** https://unisonlegal.in/judgment/allahabad-high-court/administrative-control-for-their-information-and-guidance-163716
- **Pages:** 2

## Text

426
only for receiving the copy of the documents, which are being relied by the prosecution
against him.
As applications for providing copy are often filed in the Courts below every day, I
am directed to transmit herewith a copy of judgment and order dated 03.06.2005
aforedetailed, with request that the contents of and direction in the judgment and order be
kindly brought to the notice of all judicial Officers in the judiciary under your
administrative control, for their information and guidance.
(v)
Maintenance of court diaries by the Presiding Officers of the Subordinate
Courts in their own handwriting.
C.L. No. 40 Dated: 12th October, 2004

In continuation of Court's Circular letter No. 131/VIIIb-121, dated November 21,
1978 and Circular Letter No. 45/VIIIb-121, dated July 20, 1983 on the above subject, I
am directed to say that inspite of clear directions issued by the Court, the Presiding
Officers of the Subordinate Courts are still not maintaining the court diaries in their own
handwriting and also the columns of the said diary including column nos. 2A, 2B and 2C
relating to adjournments, are not being filled in by the Presiding Officer themselves.
Upon consideration of the matter, the Hon'ble Court has taken this lapse very seriously
and has desired that the compliance of the directions as contained in the aforementioned
circular letters be now ensured.

I am, therefore, directed to request you kindly to draw the attention of all Judicial
Officers working under your administrative control and they be required to ensure strict
compliance of the above directions faithfully and punctually.
4.
ADJOURNMENT OF CASES
(i)
How to minimise
C.L. No. 22/VIII-b-13 dated 28th March, 1949 and
C.L. No. 61/VIII-h-13 dated 29th May, 1972

It has been found that Presiding Officers do not exercise proper discretion in
granting adjournments. Adjournments are very often granted as a matter of course on
flimsy grounds. This should be avoided and the cause list so adjusted as not to admit
adjournment of a case more than once for want of time.
C.L. No. 22/VIII-h-13 dated 18th March, 1949

If the pending file is heavy or is such that the cases are not likely to be fixed for
hearing within three months, presiding officer may leave fresh cases without date after
having framed issues therein. The records of such cases should be kept in a separate box
or compartment of an almirah in chronological order till it is possible to fix a date therein
within a period of three months.
C.L. No. 19/VIII h-10 dated 27th February, 1956

The correct procedure is that if a date for disposal of a sessions trial is not
available within the next two months or a date for final disposal of a suit is not available
within the next three months, no date should be fixed at all.
427
G.L. No. 73/VIII a-14 dated 29th October, 1948 read with
G.L. No. 7/VIII a-14 dated 12th February, 1949

If the criminal work is heavy, all working days should be devoted to sessions
cases and criminal appeals in which accused persons are in jail. Saturdays may, however
be excluded if required for miscellaneous work.
C.E. No. 39/VII-d-102 dated 18th March, 1971
A case should be dismissed in absentia, as far as possible, only when the same has
been listed peremptorily twice.
G.L. No. 12/VIII-b-13 dated 15th September, 1951

When a presiding officer takes short leave, he should, so far as practicable, take
care to adjourn beforehand the cases fixed for hearing during the period when he would
be absent on leave and to give timely information thereof to counsel for the parties and,
where possible, also to parties themselves and their witnesses. In criminal cases such
information should, where practicable, also be given to jurors or assessors. Where there
may be difficulty in giving information to any counsel for the parties owing to his
absence from the station or for some other cause, such information may usefully be sent
also to the Bar Association concerned.
G.L. No. 4311/67-8 dated 22nd December, 1916

In fixing adjournments dates courts should see-
1. that cases are adjourned to dates on which there is a reasonable hope of their
being heard;
2. that strict precedence is given to adjourned cases;
3. that the adjourned cases are heard de die in diem until completed; and
4. that if a case is decided either ex parte or in default restoration be not granted
except for sufficient cause shown to the satisfaction of the court.
G.L. No. 50 dated 17th August, 1948

An effort should always be made to bring old cases to as speedy a decision as
possible. Whenever old cases have to be adjourned, they should be adjourned to nearer
dates. In case they are already booked with later cases, the later cases should be
adjourned to give preference to older ones.

It is expected that a careful fixing of the cause list may not lead to such frequent
adjournments. The practice of allowing long interval to intervene between the close of
evidence and the hearing of arguments should also be avoided.
C.L. No. 3/VIII h-13 dated 16th January, 1980

The courts should be strict in the matter of granting adjournment of cases for
filing written statements.
C.L. No. 67 dated 28th October, 1964

Presiding Officers should follow the instructions contained in rule 81 of Chapter
III of General Rules, (Civil), 1957, Volume I which requires that a Judge before
beginning his work for the day should go through the cause list, dispose of all