The Supreme Court on Tuesday, November 3, asked petitioner Ashwini Upadhyay to approach its e-committee regarding uniform case naming across high courts. Justice Bagchi said, "This is a very relevant point you are raising." The court noted that standardising judicial data is already part of an ongoing e-committee project.
The Supreme Court on Tuesday, November 3, allowed petitioner Ashwini Upadhyay to submit a representation to its e-committee seeking uniform case names, registration procedures and judicial terminology across high courts, news agency Press Trust of India reported.
The court declined to hear the public interest litigation, noting that standardising case classifications was already part of the e-committee's initiative to improve access to judicial data. It also said a uniform court fee structure may not be suitable because such fees fall within the legislative powers of states.
A bench comprising Chief Justice of India Surya Kant and Justices Joymalya Bagchi and V Mohana permitted Upadhyay to place his plea before the Supreme Court's e-committee.
During the hearing, Upadhyay pointed to significant differences in the classification and naming of cases across high courts, including between benches of the same high court. He said these inconsistencies made it difficult to identify, track and search judicial records.
He said a writ petition was described as 'WP' in some high courts and 'WPA' in others. He also cited differences between the principal bench of the Allahabad High Court and its Lucknow bench.
Justice Bagchi said uniform case nomenclature was a relevant issue but had already been taken up by the e-committee as part of a broader standardisation initiative.
"This is a very relevant point you are raising. But it is already part of the uniformity project, which is like a uniform judicial code. It would help us search data better on the NJDG (National Judicial Data Grid)," Justice Bagchi said, according to PTI.
The bench said standardisation had already been introduced in district and magistrate courts through the case information system and was being extended further.
Upadhyay also highlighted variations in the number of case categories maintained by different high courts. According to the petition, the Jammu and Kashmir High Court has 238 types of cases, while the Allahabad High Court has 132.
The petition, filed through advocate-on-record Ashwani Dubey, also flagged wide differences in court fees for similar proceedings across states. Upadhyay said these variations created inequalities among litigants and called for a uniform framework.
The bench said court fees were within the legislative domain of states and that a common structure might not be appropriate because litigants' financial capacity differed across regions.
"Even court fees can vary from state to state. A resident of Delhi may have a greater capacity to pay court fees compared with a resident of Bihar or Odisha. We cannot subject poorer people to the same amount of court fees that residents of metropolitan cities may be able to afford," the Chief Justice of India said, as reported by PTI.
Justice Bagchi also said the court could not impose restrictions on state legislatures in matters within their legislative competence.
The PIL sought a uniform judicial code for all high courts and their benches. It also sought directions to the Law Commission of India to prepare a comprehensive report, in consultation with the Supreme Court and high courts, on standardising court fees, case registration procedures, judicial terminology, abbreviations and classification norms.
Alternatively, the plea sought the formation of an expert committee or directions to the Union Ministry of Law and Justice to examine the issue and frame appropriate guidelines.
The petition cited substantial differences in court fees for identical categories of litigation. It said the fee for a suit valued at Rs 10,000 ranged from Rs 250 in Punjab and Haryana to Rs 1,480 in Bihar and Jharkhand, Rs 1,430 in Maharashtra and Rs 1,157.50 in Uttar Pradesh.
For suits valued at Rs 5 lakh, the petition cited court fees of Rs 6,777 in Telangana and Rs 7,224 in Delhi, compared with Rs 37,908 in Uttar Pradesh and Rs 31,300 in Haryana.
It also pointed to differences in case abbreviations and classifications. A criminal appeal, for example, is registered under abbreviations including CRA, CR.A, CRAPL and CRL.A across various high courts.
The Supreme Court ultimately left the issues of case nomenclature, registration procedures and judicial terminology for its e-committee to consider, while maintaining that decisions on court fees remained within the powers of individual states.