Facts of the Case
The present writ petition was filed raising as of critical importance touching certain issues relating to the quality, size and utilization of papers to be used for filing pleadings and attending documents including vakalatnama, which are to be presented before the High Court at Calcutta as well as the various subordinate courts in the State of West Bengal and those in the Union Territory of Andaman and Nicobar Islands.
Arguments Advanced
The Petitioner contended to seek the following reliefs:
a)The quality of A4 size papers that are used for printing and filing matters in the Appellate Side and Original Side of the High Court should be such that the same would be cost-effective, without insisting on bond papers.
b)It would provide consistency and uniformity in the matter of filing and duplicating the papers by photostat or otherwise to be utilized when litigation reaches the superior courts:
c)The printing and filings before subordinate courts should also be in A4 size papers and should be required to be printed on both sides because, according to the petitioner, such utility of A4 size papers will considerably reduce the number of sheets that may be required to place the entire pleadings on board.
The Petitioner also pleaded that the above measures would also help to control the waste of papers.
Court’s Observation
The Bench of Hon’ble Chief Justice Thottathil B. Radhakrishnan and Justice Arijit Banerjee remarked, “we are not inclined to treat this as adversarial litigation. It is one initiated with good intention.”
Further, it was observed that the issues sought to be raised are not matters which should call for determination on the judicial side without the High Court administration dealing with the matter at the appropriate level, within a reasonable time, so that the interest of the community at large should be better subserved.
Judgment
The Court disposed of the petition, with directions to the Registrar General to raise the aforesaid issues on the administrative side of the High Court, within three weeks. Also, it was ordered to take into account the views expressed by the Bar, the Advocate General, the Additional Solicitor General and the Public Prosecutor in this regard.
Further, the Court expressed its hope that the administrative wing will decide the matter expeditiously, so as to subserve the ends of justice.
Click here to view full judgment.
Libertatem.in is now on Telegram. Follow us for regular legal updates and judgments from the Court. Follow us on Google News, Instagram, LinkedIn, Facebook & Twitter. You can also subscribe to our Weekly Email Updates. You can also contribute stories like this and help us spread awareness for a better society. Submit Your Post Now.
