Calcutta High Court (Appellete Side)
Nikunj Berlia vs The High Court At Calcutta on 22 February, 2021
22.02.2021
Item no. 16
Dd/aloke WPA 4575 of 2020
Nikunj Berlia
Vs.
The High Court at Calcutta
Mr. Phiroze Edulji, adv.
Mr. Lalratan Mondal, adv.
Ms. Aishwarya Chatterjee
... ... For the Petitioner
Mr. Saikat Banerjee, adv
... ...For the Respondent
We have heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the respondent.
This writ petition is filed raising certain issues which, according to us, are of critical importance touching various aspects relating to the quality and size of papers to be used for filing pleadings and attending documents including vakalatnama, to be presented before the High Court at Calcutta as well as the various sub-ordinate courts falling within its jurisdiction, meaning thereby the courts in the State of West Bengal and those in the Union Territory of Andaman and Nicobar Islands.
The sum and substance of the grievances raised on behalf of the petitioner is that:-
i) The larger public needs to control waste of papers and thereby requisite inputs which may be otherwise utilized for the interest of the community at large. The suggestions, as we understand, are that the quality of A4 size papers which are required 2 to be used for printing and filing the 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.
ii) Printing and filing in A4 size papers be insisted as regards filing before the sub-ordinate courts as this will provide consistency and uniformity in the matter of filing and also in the matter of duplicating the papers by photostat or otherwise to be utilized when litigation reaches the superior courts in various forms including by way of appeals, revisions, writ petitions, etc.
iii) The third suggestion that is pointed out by the petitioner is that the A4 size papers 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.
We have given our thoughtful consideration to the aforesaid suggestions of the petitioner. We are not inclined to treat this as an adversarial litigation. It is one initiated with good intention. We are, however, of the view 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.
Having regard to the entire facts and circumstances, as pointed out and delineated in the writ petition and also taking into consideration the affidavit-in-opposition filed on behalf of the High 3 Court administration, we dispose of this writ petition requiring the issues raised in the writ petition to be placed appropriately on the administrative side of the High Court by the Registrar General for due and requisite consideration, which we hope and trust would be done in such expeditious manner as would subserve the ends of justice and the better administration of the justice delivery system in the Appellate Side and Original Side of the High Court at Calcutta and the different courts in the State of West Bengal and Union Territory of Andaman and Nicobar Islands. Needless to say that the views of the three wings of the Bar and the office of learned Advocate General as well as the views of learned Additional Solicitor General and the Public Prosecutor will be elicited in writing and placed for consideration along with the requisite papers during the course of such consideration.
We are sure that at the level of the Registry requisite activities following this order will be generated within three weeks from the date of receipt of this order.
[Thottathil B. Radhakrishnan, C.J] [Arijit Banerjee, J.]