The Allahabad High Court has issued a set of formatting guidelines for physical & electronic Filings after noting that the lack of uniformity affects readability and the orderly presentation of the record.

The petition before the High Court highlighted the inconsistencies in font, font size, spacing and the use of bold and italic type in several matters.

The Bench comprising Justice Garima Prashad and Justice Ajit Kumar held, “We have noticed in several cases that petitions and other pleadings are being filed in different fonts and font sizes, with inconsistent spacing and indiscriminate use of bold and italic type. The lack of uniformity affects readability and the orderly presentation of the record. It has, therefore, become necessary to issue directions in this regard so as to bring uniformity in the manner in which pleadings are presented before the Court.”

Advocate Sheo Kinkar Singh represented the Petitioner while Chief Standing Counsel represented the Respondent.

Factual Background

The controversy came to light during the scrutiny of the petition in which the prayer clause, which was typed in italics, was not reported as a defect. The Review Officer, who had scrutinised the petition, submitted a written explanation stating that the italicised prayer could not be reported as a defect in the absence of any direction treating it as such. The High Court had called upon the Registrar General to place before it the Rules or directives, if any, governing the font, spacing, signs and margins of petitions presented before the Court. The Court noted that there was no prescribed requirement concerning headers, footers or bold lettering. The Registrar General had placed a report before the Court.

Reasoning

The Bench noted that the report disclosed that, save for the limited provisions relating to double spacing in a First Appeal paper-book, quarter margins in the matters governed by Chapter IX, and the formatting requirements contained in the e-Filing Instructions, there was no uniform prescription applicable alike to physical and electronic filings regarding font, font size, line spacing, or the use of bold and italic type. It was further noticed that no Rule, judgment, guideline or circular laying down such a uniform prescription had been issued or passed by the Full Court, the Administrative Committee or the Chief Justice.

The Bench thus issued the following directions governing the filing of petitions, appeals, applications and revisions before this Court:

  • The typed text of every petition, affidavit, counter affidavit, rejoinder affidavit, reply, application and all other pleadings prepared in English shall be in Times New Roman, size 14, with double line spacing. Pleadings prepared in Hindi shall continue to be in a Unicode font, size 14, with double line spacing.
  • Bold type shall be used only for the marking or description of annexures in the pleadings and in the index. No other part of a pleading shall be set in bold type.
  • Italic type may be used only for extracts reproduced in a pleading and for references to courts or statutory provisions. The prayer or relief clause shall not be italicised. Italic type shall not be used elsewhere.
  • The requirements relating to margins under the applicable Rules and the Instructions for Electronic Filing shall continue to be observed in petitions, applications, appeals and revisions.
  • These directions shall apply equally to physical filings.

“The Registrar General shall circulate this order forthwith to all filing and scrutiny sections at the Principal Seat of the High Court at Allahabad as well as its Lucknow Bench and shall ensure that these directions are brought to the notice of the Bar”, it ordered.

Dealing with another petition where the petitioner sought correction of the house-tax assessment and demand raised in respect of a house, the Bench ordered, “...the authority concerned, respondent No. 2, Nagar Ayukt, Nagar Nigam, Prayagraj, shall consider the grievance of the petitioner raised in his application/representation and decide the same within a period of two months from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order.”

Cause Title: Sheo Kinkar Singh v. State of U.P. and 2 others (Neutral Citation: 2026:AHC:224293-DB)

Appearance

Petitioner: Advocates Sheo Kinkar Singh, Suryaprakash Sharma

Respondent: Chief Standing Counsel, Advocates Chandan Sharma, Vijay Bahadur Maurya

Click here to read/download Order


Tags: