The Delhi High Court refused to entertain a plea seeking directions to the Law Commission of India to prepare a report on the "Uniform Judicial Code". 

A Division Bench of Chief Justice Satish Chandra Sharma and Justice Yashwant Varma noted that 

"This was dismissed by the Honourable Supreme Court. No liberty has been granted and you withdrew...How can we entertain? Issue (in the petition) can be anything. The Supreme Court order says that the petition is accordingly dismissed as withdrawn," the Bench remarked.

The Court said that Upadhyay will have seek clarification from the apex court if he wants the High Court to entertain the plea.

Upadhyay contended that this was a general order that it was passed by former Chief Justice of India (CJI) UU Lalit. Therefore, it would be difficult for him to seek clarification.

The Court, meanwhile, also refused to consider a chart that he had prepared on the issue raised in the plea.

Upadhyay ultimately withdrew his plea. The plea gives examples of different terminologies used by benches of the Bombay High Court and the Rajasthan High Court, stating that the same caused confusion.

He also pointed out the differences in court fees sought for similar matters and of similar valuation in different states, which causes injury to citizens.

"Unequal court fees in different states discriminate among citizens based on their place of birth and residence," plea adds.

Further, courts are not only adopting different norms and procedures for case registration and using different judicial terms, phrases and abbreviations, but are also taking different court fees, which is against the rule of law and right to justice, the plea asserts.

He, therefore, sought directions to the Law Commission to prepare a report in order to bring uniformity in the judicial system. He further prayed for constitution of an expert committee on the issue and orders to the Law Ministry to "prepare a comprehensive report on Uniform Judicial Code in consultation with the High Courts".