Supreme Court Issues 2025 Guidelines on Record Retention and Destruction

Thank you for reading this post, don't forget to subscribe!

The Supreme Court has introduced detailed 2025 guidelines to streamline the retention and destruction of administrative records. Judicial records remain under existing SC Rules, while the new framework brings uniformity and efficiency to non-judicial documentation.

Supreme Court Issues 2025 Guidelines on Record Retention and Destruction
Supreme Court Issues 2025 Guidelines on Record Retention and Destruction

New Delhi: Today, on June 26, In a significant move to enhance efficiency, transparency, and uniformity in managing administrative records, the Supreme Court of India has officially released the

“Guidelines for Retention and Destruction of Records – 2025.”

These new rules will govern how various non-judicial records across the Registry are to be preserved or discarded.

As stated in the guidelines:

“The Competent Authority has approved these guidelines for the Retention and Destruction of Administrative Section records in the registry of the Supreme Court of India.”

It further clarifies that

“Unless otherwise provided in Supreme Court Rules, 2013, the period of retention and destruction of office records of the Supreme Court shall be governed by these Guidelines.”

These instructions are specifically aimed at regulating administrative records, which include internal decisions, staff files, financial records, office orders, policy documents, and correspondences that are not directly related to judicial proceedings.

Judicial documents will continue to be managed under Order LVI of the Supreme Court Rules, 2013, and the 2017 Handbook on Practice and Office Procedure.

Chief Justice of India, Dr. D.Y. Chandrachud, in his official message, highlighted the rationale behind the need for a structured approach to non-judicial record management.

He observed,

“Over the years, the Registry of the Supreme Court has witnessed a significant increase in the volume and diversity of administrative records generated across its multiple branches,”

He noted that while judicial records were properly regulated, administrative ones suffered from inconsistent handling.

“This disparity leads to inconsistent practices across branches, affecting archival clarity and efficiency.”

To rectify this issue, the Supreme Court has now approved a comprehensive framework.

The CJI stated,

“The ‘Guidelines for Retention and Destruction of Records 2025’ aim to remedy this by promoting coherence, accountability, and efficiency in managing administrative records,”

These include institutional decisions, policy implementation files, audit documents, internal communications, and external engagements.

He added,

“Properly managing these records is crucial for transparency and accountability,”

Emphasizing the need for consistency, the message states:

“The Guidelines aim to establish a rational framework for retention, classification, and destruction across all Registry wings, promoting consistency and clarity while eliminating ambiguities.”

One of the key benefits of the initiative is reducing physical storage burdens.

“Operational efficiency is enhanced by the systematic elimination of obsolete documents, easing storage burdens and improving record retrieval speed,”

reads the message.

Additionally, the guidelines help ensure the Supreme Court’s compliance with legal, fiscal, and administrative obligations.

He noted,

“The Guidelines ensure compliance with audit and statutory obligations by defining appropriate retention periods based on fiscal, legal, and administrative relevance,”

Importantly, the guidelines are aligned with national public record standards and were drafted after a thorough consultation process.

“The Guidelines are a result of detailed consultation among Registrars and officials of the Registry,”

the Chief Justice mentioned, specifically acknowledging the effort and dedication of those involved in drafting the document.

“I place on record my sincere appreciation for the efforts of Mr. Pradip Y. Ladekar, Registrar at the Supreme Court, who played the instrumental role in drafting these Guidelines. He was ably supported by his staff members throughout the process.”

Other senior officials were also lauded:

“I also appreciate Mr. Bharat Parashar, Secretary General, and Mr. S.C. Munghate, Officer on Special Duty (in the rank of Secretary General), for their leadership and guidance in steering the Registry through this important initiative.”

Concluding the message, the CJI expressed optimism about the successful rollout of the guidelines.

“Ultimately, the true value of these Guidelines will be realised not merely in their creation, but in their consistent and effective implementation.”

Some general instructions outlined in the guidelines include:

  • Original submission notes or paper books signed by the Chief Justice and Judges must be preserved permanently.
  • Policy files, office orders, and circulars are also to be retained permanently.
  • Destruction of records must only occur after ensuring no pending litigation or audit is related to the files.
  • Approval from the Registrar is mandatory before record destruction.
  • Financial documents should be maintained by financial year; all other records by calendar year.

From Right to Information (RTI) files to protocols for the Chief Justice’s travel, from parking sticker applications to records of farewell dinners and creche admission registers, the new guidelines comprehensively list timelines and destruction protocols for hundreds of record categories across various branches like Admin I, II, III, Vigilance, Protocol, Reception, Recruitment Cell, Transport, and Medical.

Read in Detail- Guidelines For Retention and Destruction Of Records:

Click Here to Read More Reports On Administrative Records

author

Hardik Khandelwal

I’m Hardik Khandelwal, a B.Com LL.B. candidate with diverse internship experience in corporate law, legal research, and compliance. I’ve worked with EY, RuleZero, and High Court advocates. Passionate about legal writing, research, and making law accessible to all.

Similar Posts