Supreme Court Asks Allahabad HC To Enable E-Filing & Virtual Appearance Facilities At UP District Courts

The Supreme Court on Monday (April 15) asked the Registrar General of the Allahabad High Court to enable e-filing facility at e-Sewa Kendras of all the District Courts in the State of Uttar Pradesh.  The Court also stated that a hybrid hearing before the High Court through a virtual set-up in the District Courts of Western UP may take place in compliance with the Allahabad High Court Rules (Rules of 1952) within 2 weeks. 

The order comes as a consequence of a writ petition under Article 32 filed challenging an earlier communication of the Registrar General, dated 28.10.23 which asked the District Judges across the state to keep in abeyance the directions of the High Court issued on 18.10.23. The High Court in its communication on the administrative side, on October 18, 2023, directed the following, to ensure optimum utilisation of the E-Seva Kendras and to provide more citizen-centric services to litigants and advocates through e-filing : 

"...e-filing facility must be enabled at the e-Sewa Kendras of the District Courts of Uttar Pradesh alongwith the facility of e-affidavit. The option of photo identity verification shall be removed from the process of e-filing at the e-Sewa Kendras of District Judiciary. The litigant/lawyer must appear 'in person' at the e-sewa kendra for e-filing."

Subsequently, on 28 October 2023, the above directions were placed in abeyance by communication of the High Court Registrar General to the district judges.

In addition to this, the Petitioner also sought a mandamus to establish/set up a dedicated filing counter & virtual hearing in District & Sessions Courts of Western Uttar Pradesh for a hybrid hearing in Allahabad High Court till the decision for establishing the High Court bench in Western UP is not taken.  

The main contention of Mr Pulkit Aggarwal & AOR Ansar Ahmad Chaudhary appearing for the petitioner, was that the impugned communication dated 28.10.2023 of the Registrar General constitutes a denial of access to justice to residents of Western Uttar Pradesh. As per the written submissions, the petitioner highlighted that the absence of any permanent bench of Allahabad High Court in the Western zone of the state since 1950 has caused major obstacles for litigants and lawyers in seeking justice. In light of the same, the petitioner had previously filed a writ petition in the Apex Court seeking a dedicated filing counter and a virtual hearing set up in District Courts for hearing cases in hybrid mode in the High Court. 

The Supreme Court, on 28.8.2022 declining to entertain the writ petition, gave liberty to the petitioners to approach the Registrar General of Allahabad High Court with regards to the same. Subsequently, the communications of 18 October and 28 October 2023 took place. 

AOR Mr K Parmeshwar appearing on behalf of the Registrar General of  Allahabad High Court,  placed on record the Rules framed by the High Court in the exercise of the constitutional authority rested in it under Article 225 of the Constitution. The attention was drawn to Rule 3A of Rules of The Court 1952 which provided : 

"[3-A. (i) Unless the Court grants leave, an Advocate who is not on the Roll of Advocates in the High Court at Allahabad or Lucknow shall not be allowed to appear, act or plead in the High Court at Allahabad or Lucknow as the case might be unless he files appointment along with an Advocate who is on such roll for Allahabad Cases at Allahabad and for Lucknow Cases at Lucknow...." 

Thus Mr Parmeshwar submitted the following : (1) As regards the e-filing by litigants, the provisions contained in the circular dated 18.10.23 shall be restored; (2) As regards filing through an advocate, the requirements of Rule 3A(i) specifically indicates that an advocate who is not on the rolls of the advocates in the Allahabad and Lucknow High Courts shall not be allowed to appear at the or plead in the High Court only by filing an appointment together with an advocate whose on the roll of Allahabad and Lucknow respectively. Thus it was his contention that for advocates to engage in filing for hybrid hearings of cases in the High Court, Rule 3A has to be borne in mind. 

The bench also noted Rule 3A(iii) which indicates that the roll of advocates has to bear the name and other details of the residence and office which shall be within the limits of the city of Allahabad and Lucknow as the case may be.

(iii) The Roll of Advocates shall bear in regard to each advocate entered, his full name, father's name, passport size coloured photograph, enrolment number, date of enrolment, complete postal address both of residence and office which shall be in the municipal limits of the city of Allahabad or Lucknow as the case might be.

Considering the above provisions on the High Court Roll of Advocates and the procedure to be followed to appear in the High Court by an advocate, not on the High Court rolls per se, the bench observed that the High Court is at liberty to seek compliance as per the above-discussed provisions for the efficient functioning of the E-Seva Kendras. It was further clarified that the Rules of 1952 are not challenged in the present case. The bench led by CJI DY Chandrachud comprising Justices JB Pardiwala and Manoj Misra dictated the following : 

"Hence the Rules which have been framed by the High Court in the exercise of its constitutional jurisdiction are not in question of these proceedings. In that view of the matter, it needs to be clarified that it would be open to the High Court to seek due compliance with the provisions of Rule 3 A in regard to E-Seva Kendras." 

The bench asked the Registrar General of Allahabad  High Court to comply with the directions within a period of 2 weeks.  

Case Details: MD ANAS CHAUDHARY vs. REGISTRAR-GENERAL HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD W.P.(C) No. 001429 - / 2023 

Click Here To Read/Download Order