SUPREME COURT QUESTIONS HANDWRITTEN TRIBUNAL ORDERS UNDER E-COURTS SCHEME, SEEKS EXPLANATION FROM HIGH COURT OVER LACK OF COMPUTER ACCESS:

In a significant comment on the state of judicial digitisation in India, the Supreme Court recently expressed concern over a Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (MACT) continuing to issue handwritten orders despite the nationwide implementation of the e-Courts project. A Bench comprising Justices Rajesh Bindal and Vijay Bishnoi made the observation while dealing with a claims appeal arising from proceedings before a MACT in Hyderabad.

Upon examining the records transmitted by the Tribunal, the Court found that the entire set of order sheets had been written by hand, with certain portions difficult to read. The award in question had been delivered as recently as 2024. The Bench noted that this practice persisted even though the Government of India had invested substantial public funds running into thousands of crores of rupees, towards the computerisation of courts across the country. The e-Courts project, launched in 2007 and currently in its third phase, was specifically intended to modernise court infrastructure and promote efficiency and transparency in judicial functioning. In that context, the Court found no reasonable justification for continuing with handwritten orders, particularly when they were not clearly legible.

The difficulty in deciphering the handwritten material was such that the Supreme Court had to requisition a typed copy of the Tribunal’s orders to properly assess the matter. The Bench also pointed out procedural deficiencies in the order sheets. It observed that the names or unique identification numbers of the officers had not been mentioned alongside their initials. The absence of such identifying particulars made it difficult to determine which officer had passed a specific order or who was presiding over the court at a given point in time. This lack of clarity, the Court indicated, was inconsistent with the standards expected in a modern judicial system.

Taking note of these shortcomings, the Supreme Court directed the High Court to examine the availability and use of digital infrastructure at the Tribunal. It asked the High Court to ascertain whether computers had in fact been provided to the MACT. If computers were available, the High Court was to investigate why orders were not being typed. If they had not been supplied, the reasons for such failure were to be identified and immediate corrective measures taken. The Bench underscored that the judiciary as a whole is moving towards paperless functioning at every level, and Tribunals cannot remain outside the ambit of this digital transformation.

A copy of the judgment has been ordered to be forwarded to the Registrar General of the Telangana High Court for placing it before the Chief Justice. The decision is also to be circulated among other High Courts to facilitate similar corrective action wherever required.

These observations were made in the course of allowing appeals filed by National Insurance Company Limited against the dismissal of its appeal by the Telangana High Court. The High Court had declined to consider the insurer’s challenge to a compensation award exceeding ₹2.72 crore granted by the MACT, relying solely on an undertaking furnished during execution proceedings. The Supreme Court set aside the High Court’s orders and remitted the matter for fresh consideration on merits. Pending adjudication, it also directed the insurer to release ₹1 crore to the claimant.