Calcutta High Court: A public interest litigation (PIL) was filed raising an issue concerning the standardisation of physical court filings, namely, the use of A4-size paper of not less than 75 GSM and printing on both sides (duplex printing) for pleadings and attending documents filed before the courts. The matter is scheduled to be listed for hearing on 23 November 2026.
The petitioner is an Advocate and Member of the Bar Association of Calcutta High Court and an Associate Member of the Institute of Company Secretaries of India seeking relief without any personal, pecuniary or proprietary interest in it.
The petition refers to Nikunj Berlia v. High Court at Calcutta, WPA 4575 of 2020, in which a Division Bench, by order dated 22 February 2021, considered proposals for using A4-size paper for subordinate court filings and printing documents on both sides to reduce paper consumption. The Bench directed that the issue be placed before the administrative side through the Registrar General for consideration.
The petitioner states that he has been unable to trace any publicly available notification or circular recording the outcome of the administrative exercise. He has clarified that this does not mean that no internal consideration has taken place.
The petition relied on the Supreme Court’s Circular dated 5 March 2020, prescribing A4-size paper of not less than 75 GSM and double-sided printing for specified filings, and the National Company Law Tribunal’s Circular dated 3 September 2026, adopting duplex printing before all its Benches, subject to safeguards concerning legibility, alignment, pagination and handling of records.
The petitioner submitted that uniform filing standards could reduce paper consumption and the physical bulk of court records, while facilitating scanning, photocopying, transportation, storage and reproduction. The proposed practice would, however, permit reasonable exceptions where single-sided printing is necessary to preserve legibility, authentication or the effective presentation of documents such as maps, plans, charts and photographs.
The PIL sought ascertainment of the status of the earlier administrative exercise and, if necessary, fresh consideration of a uniform filing policy, including the issuance of an appropriate administrative circular or practice direction after consultation with the Bar and other stakeholders, as deemed necessary.
The issues to be decided are as follows:
1. Whether in view of the order dated 22 February 2021 passed by the Division Bench of this Court in WPA 4575 of 2020, Nikunj Berlia v. High Court at Calcutta, whereby the issue of A4-size paper and printing on both sides for pleadings and attending documents before the High Court and the subordinate courts was directed to be placed before the administrative side through the Registrar General, the present status and outcome of such administrative consideration is liable to be ascertained?
2. Whether, having regard to the existing institutional practice of this Court concerning A4-size paper, the Circular of the Supreme Court dated 5 March 2020 prescribing A4 paper of not less than 75 GSM and printing on both sides, and the subsequent administrative adoption of duplex printing by the National Company Law Tribunal, the competent administrative authority may consider a uniform practice concerning the size and manner of physical court filings?
3. Whether a uniform practice requiring A4-size paper of not less than 75 GSM and duplex printing for physical pleadings and attending documents before this Court and the courts under its administrative control throughout the State of West Bengal would further consistency and uniformity in filing practices and facilitate reproduction and transmission of records when proceedings travel from subordinate courts to superior courts?
4. Whether such administrative filing practice may appropriately incorporate reasonable exceptions in cases where duplex printing is technically impracticable or may affect legibility, authentication or effective presentation of documents, including maps, plans, charts, photographs and other material requiring single-sided printing?
5. Whether, in the facts and circumstances of the present case, the limited relief of administrative consideration and, if found appropriate, issuance of a suitable notification, practice direction or administrative circular concerning A4-size paper and duplex printing can be considered by the competent administrative authority in furtherance of orderly, economical and efficient management of physical Court records, without treating the proceeding as adversarial litigation against any individual officer or authority?
The matter did not come up for hearing on 14 October 2026, and is scheduled to be listed before the Calcutta High Court on 23 November 2026.
[Akash Sharma v. High Court of Calcutta]
