1989 (11) TMI 57 - SC - Central Excise

Supreme Court orders reimbursement of copying costs for essential legal documents

The Supreme Court ruled that the department should reimburse the petitioners for reasonable expenses incurred in copying essential documents in a legal ... Right to inspection and copying of seized documents - liability to bear expenses for copies - departmental obligation under internal instructions to furnish copies - judicial direction for identification and sifting of voluminous recordsRight to inspection and copying of seized documents - judicial direction for identification and sifting of voluminous records - Procedure for inspection and practical identification of essential documents to be copied. - HELD THAT: - Petitioners were allowed to inspect the voluminous records and to make copies of those documents they considered necessary. The Court directed the Collector to meet petitioners and their counsel to identify a practical set of essential documents, and to sift the seized material so that non-essential surplusage can be weeded out as far as practicable at this stage, thereby reducing the number of documents to be copied. This pragmatic procedure was adopted because handing over copies of every document would be disproportionate and unworkable. [Paras 1, 2]Collector to meet petitioners and counsel to identify essential documents and to sift records so as to limit copying to practicable essentials.Liability to bear expenses for copies - departmental obligation under internal instructions to furnish copies - Who must bear the expense of copying documents and reimbursement mechanism. - HELD THAT: - The Court held that reasonable expenditure for copying those documents which the petitioner ultimately finds reasonably necessary shall be reimbursed by the department. The decision rests on practical considerations and on the departmental instruction (Para 9(a)) which enjoins the department to furnish copies at its own cost. Therefore, while petitioners may make copies on inspection, the department must reimburse reasonable copying expenses. [Paras 1, 3]Reasonable copying expenses are to be reimbursed by the department; departmental instruction para 9(a) supports furnishing copies at department's cost.Return of documents not relied upon - Return of documents which the department does not intend to rely upon. - HELD THAT: - The Court directed that documents on which the department does not seek to rely shall be returned to the petitioners, if not already returned, within four weeks from the date of the order. This ensures that petitioners are not deprived of property or records unnecessarily once the department has dispensed with them for its case. [Paras 4]Documents not relied upon by the department to be returned to petitioners within four weeks.Final Conclusion: Petition dismissed with directions: Collector to convene a meeting to identify and sift essential documents for copying; petitioners may inspect and copy necessary documents; reasonable copying expenses to be reimbursed by the department in view of departmental instruction; documents not relied upon to be returned within four weeks; Special Leave Petition disposed of. Issues involved: Determination of expenses for copying documents in a legal proceeding.Summary:1. The petitioners requested copies of documents from the Collector of Central Excise, who suggested that the petitioners inspect the documents and make copies of what they need due to the extensive nature of the documents. The question arose regarding who should bear the expenses for making copies. 2. The Supreme Court proposed a practical solution by requiring the Collector to meet with the petitioners and their counsel to identify essential documents for copying. The Collector should also sift through the seized documents to identify necessary ones for the department, reducing non-essential documents for copying.3. The Court ruled that the department should reimburse the petitioners for reasonable expenses incurred in copying essential documents, citing Departmental Instructions that require the department to provide copies at its own cost.4. Documents not needed by the department should be returned to the petitioners within four weeks.5. The Special Leave Petition was disposed of with these directions and observations.