Begin typing your search above and press return to search.
proflie-avatar
Login
exit_to_app
DEEP READ
Munambam Waqf issue decoded
access_time 16 Nov 2024 10:48 PM IST
Ukraine
access_time 16 Aug 2023 11:16 AM IST
Foreign espionage in the UK
access_time 22 Oct 2024 2:08 PM IST
Netanyahu: the world’s Number 1 terrorist
access_time 5 Oct 2024 11:31 AM IST
exit_to_app
Homechevron_rightIndiachevron_rightLawyers not to bring...

Lawyers not to bring paper to court; Justice Chandrachud's Constitution bench to go "green"

text_fields
bookmark_border
Lawyers not to bring paper to court; Justice Chandrachuds Constitution bench to go green
cancel

New Delhi: Justice DY Chandrachud directed the attorneys not to submit any papers or physical documents on Wednesday, stating that the Constitution bench he will preside over will be a "green bench."

"We will keep this a completely green bench so there would be no papers. Please don't carry papers," said Justice Chandrachud to the lawyers.

When a lawyer mentioned difficulty using technology, Justice Chandrachud said that staff from the Supreme Court Registry and the IT cell were available to provide training for attorneys on Saturdays in using technology to deliver their cases.

Justice MR Shah also comprising the bench told the advocate, "We also got training, someday you have to start".

"The Secretary-General and the IT Cell head are masters of technology, they said that they are willing to train the seniors on how to use technology on Saturdays," Justice Chandrachud added.

The bench thereafter gave the Registry instructions to scan paper books and make them available to the bench and the parties, ANI reported.

While listening to a disagreement between the Delhi government and the Centre on control of administrative services in the nation's capital, the bench made the statement.

The three additional cases before the Constitution bench of Justices DY Chandrachud, MR Shah, Krishna Murari, Hima Kohli, and PS Narasimha concern the Maharashtra political crisis dispute, the legality of Section 6A of the Citizenship Act, and the legality of extending Article 334's provision for reservation and nomination in the Legislative Assembly beyond its initial 10-year period of operation.


Show Full Article
TAGS:supreme court#Justice Chandrachud
Next Story