The Bombay High Court has clarified that court fees in writ petitions under Articles 226 and 227 may have to be paid separately by each petitioner when several people join a case but pursue individual causes of action.
Justice Sandeep V. Marne delivered the order on August 25, 2026, in an Interim Application filed by advocate Satyam A. Surana. The application sought a uniform direction that the fixed fee under Entry 1(f) of Schedule II of the Maharashtra Court Fees Act, 1959 should be charged “per Petition” rather than “per Petitioner”.
Background of the Case
The dispute arose after petitioners in the main writ petition were asked to pay Rs.250 each. Surana argued that the statute prescribes a fixed fee for an “Application or Petition” and does not expressly use the words “per Petitioner”. He also relied on earlier decisions, including Machindra Rambhau Chavan, to contend that a joint petition should attract one fixed fee.
The High Court examined Supreme Court and High Court decisions and held that the issue cannot be decided merely by counting petitions. The nature of the relief and the petitioners’ causes of action are important.
Court’s Observation
The Court referred to the Supreme Court’s decision in Mota Singh and several decisions of the Bombay High Court, including Santosh Narayan Gaikwad. These cases recognise that where petitioners have individual grievances and would receive individual benefits, separate court fees can be required even when the court permits them to proceed through one joint petition.
Justice Marne explained the distinction in clear terms:
“The key to the problem is to examine whether what is sought to be espoused is a ‘common interest’ or ‘individual interest’.”
The Court further held that a single fee can be accepted where the petition advances a common cause and the relief benefits the group as a whole.
Decision
Applying that principle, the Court noted that the main petition involved individual petitioners seeking higher pension and pensionary benefits, including arrears. Since the benefit would accrue separately to each petitioner, separate court fees were payable.
The Court ultimately clarified that under Entry 1(f)(ii), court fees are payable “per Petitioner” and not “per Petition” when individual causes of action are pursued in a joint petition and the outcome individually benefits the petitioners. Where the same or common cause is pursued by multiple petitioners, one set of court fees would suffice.
The Interim Application was accordingly disposed of.
Case Details
Case Title: Satyam A. Surana v. The High Court of Bombay through Registrar General
Case Number: Interim Application (Stamp) No. 22879 of 2026 in Writ Petition No. 9463 of 2026
Judge: Justice Sandeep V. Marne
Decision Date: 25 August 2026
-300x169.webp)
-300x169.webp)
