BHAGABATI PROSAD BANERJEE, J. ( 1 ) THE Registrar, Original Side, of this Court preferred this appeal against the order dated 12/06/1995, passed by the learned Trial Judge, in so far as permitting the writ petitioner, opposite party, to move Application without routing it through Computer Department which had been very recently set up. ( 2 ) PREVIOUSLY, so long it was a practice in the Original Side of this Court to move the Applications before the learned Judges merely by presenting the same directly to the Court. There was no standing rule on the Original Side of this Court which prescribed moving of an application or filing a petition without numbering thereof as the same was the practice in this Court so long. ( 3 ) IN order to keep it on records, the particulars of the Applications or petitions to be filed in the Court and giving a number thereon, a Computer Section had been set up with the approval of the learned Chief Justice, who is the Administrative Head of this Court, who duly approved such procedure of routing of applications and petitions through computer department. There is no rule to the contrary in the Original Side of this Court and the practice that has been introduced is not in conflict to any of the rules of the Original Side of this Court. ( 4 ) THE writ petitioner, opposite party, Sri Bijoy Ghosh, filed an application before the learned Trial Judge on 12/06/1995, without following new procedures laid down in this behalf, and the learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the writ petitioner, opposite party, contended before the learned Trial Judge that it has been the practice on the Original Side of this Court for several decades to move it without following any procedure and insisted on following the age-old and long practice, without routing the applications through a computer department which had been set up in the Original Side. Whereupon, the learned Trial Judge had held that the long standing practice of moving the applications in the Original Side may be changed only by an Amendment of the Standing Rule, or an introduction of a new rule or in any other manner. The learned Trial Judge had also upheld the contention of the writ petitioner, opposite party, that such a change in the procedure do not bind the Bar and the litigants. The learned Trial Judge had also upheld the contention of the writ petitioner, opposite party, that such a change in the procedure do not bind the Bar and the litigants. Accordingly, the learned Trial Judge allowed the old practice to continue giving a go-bye to the new directive of filing it in the Computer Section. After entertaining the application, the learned Trial Judge passed an order on the merits of the application, but this appeal is only against the order of the learned Trial Judge, in so far as entertaining the application without routing it through the Computer Section and upholding the right of the litigants or the Bar to move application following the old system that was in vogue. Accordingly, the appeal is confined only to that part of the order which deals with computerisation of the records of Original Side. ( 5 ) RECENTLY, for the purpose of computerisation of the records of the Original Side of this Court, centralized Filing Section has been started on and from 12/06/1995. Under that system, the concerned Advocates-on-Records are required to file all applications, petitions and plaints in the said Centralized Filing Section, along with a filled up pro forma being Presentation Form for entertaining the details of the application into the computer. ( 6 ) AFTER such Presentation Form is filled up, the Department at first ledgers the same in two ledgers, one is for the even numbers and the other is for the odd numbers, and a number is given to the application, petition etc. ( 7 ) AFTER such entry is made in the Centralized Filing Section, which is fitted with computers, the papers are distributed to different departments, for example - (a) Current Record Department; (b) Testamentary Department; (c) Insolvency Department etc. Thereafter, the Presentation Forms are sent to the Computer Department for data entry. ( 8 ) THE concerned department, i. e. Current Record Department, Testamentary Department, Insolvency Department etc. , after receiving the papers immediately ledger it and send them to the concerned Courts. The Court Officer of the concerned Court, after receiving the papers, send the same to the Board Maker for being listed on the next day or on any appropriate date as mentioned therein. , after receiving the papers immediately ledger it and send them to the concerned Courts. The Court Officer of the concerned Court, after receiving the papers, send the same to the Board Maker for being listed on the next day or on any appropriate date as mentioned therein. ( 9 ) THE Current Record Department, for the purpose of entering those application papers, is maintaining several ledgers like - (i) Award; (ii) Special Suit; (iii) Extraordinary Suit; (iv) Income-tax Matters; (v) Patent Appeal; (vi) Transfer of Companies Matter; (vii) Transfer of Banking Company Suits; (viii) Execution Matters etc. ( 10 ) THE Testamentary Department, after receiving the papers, enter the same in the following ledgers - (I) Testamentary Application Ledgers; (ii) Testamentary Suit Register; (iii) Matrimonial Suit Ledger; (iv) Matrimonial Suit Register; (v) Admiralty Suit Ledger; (vi) Admiralty Suit Register. ( 11 ) THEREAFTER, after scrutinising the papers, the Department directly send the matters to the Court and the Court Officer concerned also send the matters to the Board Maker for listing the same on the next day or any appropriate date as mentioned therein. ( 12 ) THE Insolvency Department also ledger the applications after receiving the same from the Centralized Filing Section and after scrutinizing they put up the same before the Registrar (Insolvency) for being placed before the appropriate Court for necessary direction. ( 13 ) AS regards suits where leave under Clause 12 under Letters Patent and / or leave under Order 2, Rule 2 of the Code of Civil Procedure has to be obtained, the said leave has to be first obtained from the concerned Court and from the concerned Judges and thereafter the plaints have to be tendered with the filled up Presentation Form in the Centralized Filing Section whereupon the same procedures are followed. ( 14 ) THIS Court can take judicial notice of the fact that the members of the Bar were facing tremendous difficulty for not getting the number of the petitions or under the case, filed directly to the Court, and it took several days to get the numbers from the Department as under the old practice, petition is moved to the Court without number and it is only after the orders were passed on the petitions without any number and the same were sent to the Department and the concerned Department used to allot number serially and this process took some time and inordinate delay was made and because of this reason, the litigants could not apply for the certified or the xerox copy of the order in the absence of any such number. That had caused serious dissensions among the Members of the Bar and inter alia, on this ground, three Members of the Bar had to go on strike and one of the grievances of the Bar was that some sort of numbering must be given immediately before presentation and/or after presentation of the petition so that the litigants can apply for certified copy or the xerox certified copy of the order. It is a matter of common knowledge that ultimately the dispute was resolved on the basis of an assurance given on behalf of this Court that a Central Filing Section would be set up for removing these difficulties and accordingly this system of Centralised Filing System with computers had been introduced with the approval of the learned Chief Justice of this Court. ( 15 ) THE introduction of this system could ensure that each and every application and petition, before they are moved before the Court, the same would bear a number for the purpose of identification of the case so that the papers are not lost or misled and / or no inconvenience is caused to the litigants and the Members of the Bar in identifying the petitions and the applications; and consequently, the delay in getting numbers and consequently the delay in filing application of the certified copies or the xeror certified copies are obviated. ( 16 ) UNDER the rules of the Original Side of this Court, there is no such rule that the applications could be moved without having some formalities. ( 16 ) UNDER the rules of the Original Side of this Court, there is no such rule that the applications could be moved without having some formalities. The learned Trial Judge was of the view that introduction of this system would take away the right of the parties to move urgent applications. But it appears that the system that is introduced cannot be said to have taken away that right as even after the introduction of that system, whenever an urgency is expressed by an Advocate in respect of any matter in the Filing Section, the Department also takes expeditious steps for sending the papers before the concerned Court and this Court have been assured by the Registrar, Original Side, of this Court, on an affidavit, that necessary instruction in this respect have also been issued to the concerned Officers and staff. Urgent directions had also been given that in routing the matter to the Centralised Filing Section, there should be no delay caused in any manner whatsoever. Furthermore, urgent matters are also being entertained by the Court directly and for this purposed Court is always at liberty to issue directions to the Filing Section for immediate sending of the matter to the Court, routing the matter through the Centralized Filing Section so that in course of the day the same may be moved before the Court without any delay so that in urgent matters litigants may get appropriate remedy, if any in the matter. ( 17 ) SO far as the old matters are concerned; which are appearing in the list, the Advocate-on-Records were to fill up the pro forma and submit the same before the Court Officer concerned and the Court Officer, after receiving such pro forma, is to send the same to the Computer Department for data entry. ( 18 ) THIS system, which has been introduced, would help the office of this Court, would help to keep track over all matters and within a minute or so. They could give information on all matters which are pending and/or disposed of. We must remember that we are living in an age of computerisation of datas, and informations and particulars are preserved in the computers, Computer ensures speed, which is essential for the modern day life. They could give information on all matters which are pending and/or disposed of. We must remember that we are living in an age of computerisation of datas, and informations and particulars are preserved in the computers, Computer ensures speed, which is essential for the modern day life. The computer requires a small space, whereas if any information is to be preserved in an age-old system, that would require a very bigger space. Space is also a problem of the day everywhere and particularly in this High Court where the space is insufficient for the present requirement. The computerisation will also ensure that no petition or plaint is mixed up with other papers as each and every petition and application bear their separate numbers and separate entities. Central Filing Section, in the Original Side of this Court is the first step towards computerisation. We are told that the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India has also introduced the computerisation of the matters. It should be the endeavour of this Court to achieve the standard of service and performance with the changing society, when all over the world computerization has become essential for better efficiency and for better service. Such a change, which will ensure these things, which is the need of the day. Even in the Court of the United Kingdom, much has been done to reduce the stress felt in Court by the child witnesses. In certain cases of violence and sexual abuse, television links are used so children can give evidence from a private room rather than having to go into the Court room. Video recording of interviews with the children witnesses, may be played to the Jury as the child's main evidence. There are Child Liaison Officers in Court centres with television links. The part of their role is to show witnesses, the Court and the equipment before hearing. ( 19 ) WHEN even in the judicial system in the United Kingdom, modern technology has been introduced to obviate these difficulties and many other difficulties, we cannot lag behind in the name of maintaining the old traditions. When the system has been introduced for raising standards and improving performance, the same must be welcomed by all. ( 20 ) IN the United States of America, a telephone hearing was introduced replacing the system of face to face hearing. When the system has been introduced for raising standards and improving performance, the same must be welcomed by all. ( 20 ) IN the United States of America, a telephone hearing was introduced replacing the system of face to face hearing. In the United States of America, for the purpose of hearing the applications for public assistance, there are six regional hearing centres for a so-called face to face hearing. The face to face hearing was replaced by telephone hearing. This telephone hearing was challenged. The American Court held that the applicants had failed to satisfy their burden that the Constitution compels face to face hearings and there is a risk of an erroneous deprivation by virtue of the telephone procedures as stay currently existing there. Additionally, substitute procedural safeguards were available and were being installed i. e. , speaker phones. These provide a method by which all interested parties (other than the examiner) meet in the same room and physically confront each other. This obviates the problem identified by the plaintiff i. e. , their lack of access to caseworker notes during testimony. The user of speaker phones permits Counsel to be in the same room as well as witnesses and provides additional safeguards to further ensure a full and searching cross-examination. In this connection, it was held that the due process under the American Constitution did not shackle the Government's ability to prevent the drain of fiscal and administrative resources". In fact, the Government can enact "procedures for prompt pre-termination hearing by skilful use of facilities". It was further held in that case that new procedures indicated in the wake of all declining Government revenues, will result in saving of fifty to sixty thousand dollars, per year, in transportation costs plus additional unquantified savings, resulting from quicker decisions and fewer 'frivolous' appeals. The results of the savings were not simply returned to the State coffers. Rather, they represent monies available to claimants who qualify for benefits. As such it was observed that those efficiencies attributable to a new procedure help to maintain the fiscal integrity of the social programmes involved. In the very real sense "they promote the general welfare and secure the blessings of liberty to ourselves and our prosperity. Rather, they represent monies available to claimants who qualify for benefits. As such it was observed that those efficiencies attributable to a new procedure help to maintain the fiscal integrity of the social programmes involved. In the very real sense "they promote the general welfare and secure the blessings of liberty to ourselves and our prosperity. " ( 21 ) THE said Telephone hearing system was challenged, inter alia, on the ground that it would deprive the party to observe witness demeanour and meaningfully judge creditability and also they are unable to observe the hearing officers' reactions to the testimony adduced at the hearing. Hence, they complain that they were deprived of various non-verbal media such as "nervous gesture, a bored or impartial look" which would otherwise indicate to counsel the need to modify the time of enquiry. Accordingly, we are of the view that the introduction of this system is not in conflict with any rules and/or it is not necessary to amend the rules before its introduction. True, at the initial stage of introduction of this system might have some problems, but very soon the Department will overcome these difficulties and will be able to expedite all matters. Such a procedure is not intended to obstruct the course of justice. If steps taken to make it easier for the Court to carry out the business in the Court and for raising standards and improving performance and when this system has been introduced for efficient and speed system, the same cannot be stopped for upholding the traditions of this Court which were built up and not supported by any rules of procedures of this Court. The system that has been introduced, is a part of the procedure for filing the petitions and applications and this is the inherent power of the learned Chief Justice to make a change for increasing efficiency and standard of service particularly in view of the background in which it was introduced. The system that has been introduced, is a part of the procedure for filing the petitions and applications and this is the inherent power of the learned Chief Justice to make a change for increasing efficiency and standard of service particularly in view of the background in which it was introduced. ( 22 ) ACCORDINGLY, the order of the learned Trial Judge that the age-old practice of moving the applications and petitions directly to the Court without routing through the Centralized Filing Section and that the same could not be introduced without amending the rules and / or introducing new rules is hereby set aside and we make it clear that the present system, that has been introduced, should continue and as there is a committee of three learned Judges of this Court to supervise the Computer Section, we are confident that in case of any difficulty in achieving the desired end, steps would be taken to remove all these difficulties and make it a very efficient system which is necessary in the changing society. ( 23 ) ACCORDINGLY, the appeal is allowed to the extent indicated above. But we make it clear that we have not interfered with the order passed by the learned Trial Judge on merit, Since on merits separate appeal has been preferred, the same will be dealt with and disposed of separately. ( 24 ) THE appeal, which is treated as on the day's list, and the application are both disposed of accordingly. ( 25 ) ALL undertaking given by the Appellant are discharged. There will be no order as to costs. ( 26 ) RAM PRAKASH GUPTA, J. :- I agree. Order accordingly.