The Supreme Court on Friday praised the highlighted concern in a plea addressing the necessity for page limits on court-filed petitions.
However, it noted that may be difficult to frame the “one size fits all” direction of this nature.
The bench headed by Chief Justice DY Chandrachud, expressed that if the petitioner offers practical suggestions on the administrative aspect to expedite case resolutions, they can present a representation to the apex court’s secretary general.
The bench, also comprising Justices JB Pardiwala and Manoj Misra, stated, “While the concern of the petitioner in setting out the need for page limits on petitions in the court is laudable, it may be difficult for the court to frame a one size fits all direction of this nature.”
The petitioner’s legal representative informed the bench that the plea aimed at enhancing access to justice.
The CJI observed, “But tell us, how do we limit. Can we say in all matters, there should be a page limit on written submissions? You have, on the one hand, the constitution bench hearing Article 370 (matter) and then you have a petition under the Consumer Protection Act. Can we say that you should not have a written submission beyond 10 pages.”
Justice Chandrachud stated the American Supreme Court’s jurisdiction is very different from ours.
The petitioner’s counsel suggested that the administrative side of the apex court could consider the matter.
While disposing of the plea and stating that the petitioner may be at liberty to place a representation before the secretary general, the bench observed this would not give rise to any fresh cause of action.
