Why Supreme Court has called for SOP while filing paper SLP books

The Supreme Court recently called for the adoption of a Standard Operating Procedure (SOP) to streamline the filing of paper books (preparation of pleadings and other relevant documents) before the top court in cases arising out of Special Leave Petitions (SLPs) (Anjumol VA and ors vs. Kerala Public Service Commission and ors).

A bench of judges J. K. Maheshwari And Sanjay Karol noted that the Supreme Court was faced with several practical problems as the paper books filed before it were riddled with defects.

The Bench thus directed its General Secretary, Registrar and Judicial Registrar (Judge) to prepare an SOP expeditiously, after obtaining appropriate orders from the Chief Justice of India (CJI).

The Court passed the order but reserved its judgment in a case involving appointments by the Kerala Public Service Commission.

The Bench has also noted certain issues that have been pointed out time and again in paper books filed before the Court, including the following:

(i) The orders passed in the proceedings are not attached to the paper books;

(ii) In service matters, counsel for the petitioners has not annexed the relevant rules in the paper books of the SLP or even referred to them in pleadings. Sometimes the rules were submitted piecemeal, with applications or additional documents, forcing cases to be postponed, creating additional financial burdens for parties and delays in adjudication.

(iii) Counter affidavits are sometimes added to the SLP paper book without marking and attracting attention and sometimes as a separate paper book. All this means that the judges have to unnecessarily search through the documents and waste time.

(iv) When convenience compilations are stored as directed by the Court, they shall not be sent in paper form or by email to the judges’ residential offices, or even during hearings.

(v) The IA number is not displayed correctly on the front cover. The applications are not date-wise added to the paper books, which causes inconvenience to the judges.

vi) Other ancillary issues also arose in various paper books, which caused problems in the day-to-day functioning of the Court.

“We hope and trust that for the efficient functioning of the Court, compliance will take place as quickly as possible,” the spokesperson said. the Bench added in its April 16 decision.