Times New Roman 14, double line spacing, and bold and italic type only for limited purposes: from November 12, 2026, that is the format every English pleading filed in the Allahabad High Court must follow.
Prayagraj: Uniform formatting directions for all petitions, affidavits, counter affidavits, rejoinders, replies, applications and other pleadings, applying equally to physical filings, have been issued by the Allahabad High Court while deciding a writ petition over a house-tax assessment [Sheo Kinkar Singh v. State of U.P. and 2 Others].
Justice Ajit Kumar and Justice Garima Prashad, sitting as a Division Bench, delivered the judgment on October 28, 2026. It had been reserved on September 24, 2026.
The new format, point by point
For petitions, appeals, applications and revisions, the Bench issued the following directions:
- The directions apply equally to physical filings.
- Pleadings in English must be in Times New Roman, size 14, with double line spacing. Pleadings in Hindi continue in a Unicode font, size 14, with double line spacing.
- Bold type may be used only for marking or describing annexures in the pleadings and in the index. No other part of a pleading may be in bold.
- Italic type may be used only for extracts reproduced in a pleading and for references to courts or statutory provisions. The prayer or relief clause must not be italicised.
- Margin requirements under the applicable Rules and e-filing instructions continue to apply.
Circulation of the order to all filing and scrutiny sections at the Principal Seat at Allahabad and the Lucknow Bench was entrusted to the Registrar General, who must also bring the directions to the notice of the Bar. From November 12, 2026, the Stamp Reporting Sections will scrutinise filings in line with them.
From an italicised prayer to a court-wide rule
It started with a prayer clause typed in italics that scrutiny had not reported as a defect. Noticing similar inconsistencies in font, font size, spacing and the use of bold and italic type in several matters, the Court called for an explanation from the Stamp Reporting Section.
The Review Officer who had scrutinised the petition explained in writing, on August 6, 2026, that an italicised prayer could not be reported as a defect when no direction treated it as one. The Court then asked the Registrar General to place before it the Rules or directives, if any, on font, spacing, signs and margins. His report showed that the Allahabad High Court Rules, 1952 and the e-filing instructions did not lay down a uniform format applicable to both physical and electronic filings.
In the Court’s words
“We have noticed in several cases that petitions and other pleadings are being filed in different fonts and font sizes, with inconsistent spacing and indiscriminate use of bold and italic type. The lack of uniformity affects readability and the orderly presentation of the record.”
The house-tax writ itself
The writ petition sought correction of a house-tax assessment and demand. On its merits, the Court directed the Nagar Ayukt, Nagar Nigam, Prayagraj, to decide the petitioner’s pending representation of July 14, 2026 within two months.
What changes for practitioners
A gap in the High Court’s rules is filled by the directions: the rules prescribed spacing for some paper-books but no common standard for font, size or emphasis across physical and electronic filings. Non-compliant pleadings can be reported as defective from November 12, now that scrutiny sections are bound to apply the format.
Emphasis is where practitioners at Allahabad and Lucknow will feel the change first. Bold is limited to annexure markings and the index, and the prayer clause, often italicised for effect, must now be in plain type.
Case Title: Sheo Kinkar Singh v. State of U.P. and 2 Others [Writ-C No. 31056 of 2026]
Bench: Justice Ajit Kumar and Justice Garima Prashad, Allahabad High Court
Date of Judgment: October 28, 2026
Appearances: Surya Prakash Sharma for the petitioner; Ashish Mishra and Chandan Sharma for the High Court; Standing Counsel for the State