Gujarat High Court Rejects Litigant's Plea To Argue Case In Gujarati, Incompetence In English No Ground
Image: Ashutosh Mistry
The Gujarat High Court dismissed a man's plea–who appeared as party in person–challenging a certificate issued by High Court Legal Services (HCLS) Committee holding him "incompetent" to argue his case before the court in English language.
The petitioner challenged the certificate whereby the Committee refused to grant permission to the petitioner for arguing his case before the High Court as a party-in-person. The petitioner sought quashing of the Certificate on the ground that conduct of proceedings in English language before the High Court infringes his right and he maybe permitted to argue his case in Gujarati language.
Justice Aniruddha P. Mayee found 'no infirmity in the certificate' and held,
“…the Certificate dated 21.08.2025 has been issued to the petitioner wherein he has been held to be incompetent. The respondents have also observed that the petitioner's educational qualification is 10th pass; he is unable to understand English language; he is unable to express in English language and he has no clarity about his thoughts and is unable to explain the facts of the matter in English language and therefore, he is not competent to assist the Court in person and he is advised to engage advocate of his choice or to approach the High Court Legal Services Committee...In overall view of the matter, there is no infirmity in the Certificate granted by the respondents. The Special Civil Application is devoid of merits and is accordingly dismissed".
The Court in its order referred to a 2015 case of Suo-motu vs. Manish Kanaiyalal Gupta & Ors wherein it was held:
- The official language of the Gujarat High Court is English and therefore, the presentation of the case has to be in English and it cannot be in any language other than English language.
- The committee can certify competency of a party-in-person only if the person has ability to understand, express in English and has the clarity of thought to explain the case in English.
- No party in person will be able to address the Court other than English language and unless his competency is so certified by the committee.
The counsel for the petitioner submitted that the decision in the case of Suo-motu vs. Manish Kanaiyalal Gupta & Ors has been 'misinterpreted by the Committee'.
The counsel for the respondent argued that the Certificate issued is just and proper as the committee assessed the petitioner as per law laid down and rules. He further argued that the petitioner cannot insist on arguing in Gujarati language and would require an interpreter to argue in English as he does not understand English. Therefore, he submitted the respondents have rightly refused the Certificate to the petitioner.
The court said that it had also directed the petitioner to approach the High Court Legal Services Committee for providing him legal aid in the present petition, whereafter the High Court Legal Service Committee has given counsel to the petitioner to argue the present case.
The Court then dismissed the matter finding it devoid of merits.
Case Title: Sanjaybhai Bhikabhai Parvadiya vs Pranav S. Dave, Judicial Registrar & Anr.
Case Number: Special Civil Application No. 16633 of 2025