N.KUMAR Vs. SECRETARY OF GOVERNMENT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This writ petition has been filed by the petitioner praying for issuance of a writ of certiorari to call for the order of the 1 st respondent made in G.O.(M.S.)No.289, dtd. 13/8/2015 and to quash the same as illegal and violative of principles of natural justice.

(2.) In the affidavit filed in support of the writ petition, it has been averred by the petitioner as follows:- The petitioner has been appointed as Notary in the city of Chennai for a period of 5 years with effect from 19/12/2001, which was subsequently renewed periodically and lastly renewed for a period of 5 years from 19/12/2011 and it is due to expire on 18/12/2016. The petitioner has been practicing as a Notary without any negative remark or complaint. While so, one Mr.Manoharan came along with his sisters and brothers and got attestation of respective persons' letters to the Assistant Engineer, Tamil Nadu Electricity Board, Palavakkam, Chenani, wherein they have given no objection in favour of one Mr.R.Manoharan for obtaining an electricity service connection for Door No.145, Philips Street, Chinna Neelagarai. The said persons were duly identified and on verification only, the petitioner had attested the said letters on 2/6/2011. Nearly after a period of two years, the respondents 2 & 3 herein, who are the brothers of the said Manoharan, have made a complaint to the 1 st respondent that the petitioner has attested the signature of them in the affidavit given to the Electricity Board without verifying the residence proof and identifying the persons concerned. Pursuant to the said complaint, the petitioner was called for submitting a written statement and accordingly, he submitted a detailed written statement/defence during August, 2013. Pursuant to his written statement, the 1 st respondent referred the matter to the learned Principal Judge, City Civil Court, to conduct an enquiry.

(3.) The 1 st respondent has filed a counter, contending that the respondents 2 & 3 in their complaints dtd. 24/6/2013, have alleged that the petitioner herein has attested in a No Objection Letter dtd. 2/6/2011 as if the respondents 2 & 3 have signed in it so as to enable one Thiru.Manoharan to get EB connection illegally for the land comprised in Survey No.68/1C, 69/2 and 69AC which is the subject property in a Civil case pending against him. The respondents 2 & 3 have in their respective complaints stated that they have not signed in the said No Objection Letter, dtd. 2/6/2011 and their signatures were forged and the residential addresses of both the respondents 2 & 3 mentioned in the said document are also wrong. In this regard, the complainants/respondents 2 & 3, have requested to take necessary action against the Notary/petitioner herein for not verifying the identity of the executants before attesting the document. In this connection, written statement of defence was called for from the petitioner in the aforesaid two complaints vide Government letter, dtd. 31/7/2015 under Sub-Rule (5) of Rule 13 of the Notaries Rules, 1956. The petitioner had also submitted his written statement of defence dtd. 13/8/2015, wherein he had denied the allegations as baseless, stating that he had attested the said 'No Objection Letter', dtd. 2/6/2011, only after verifying the identity of the executants. Since the petitioner/Notary has not produced any documentary evidence to prove his contention and in order to find out whether the executants/deponents have signed in the Notarial Register maintained by the petitioner/Notary as required under Rule 11(2) of the Notaries Rules, in Government Letters, dtd. 6/9/2013, the learned Principal Judge, City Civil Court, Chennai was requested through the Registrar General, High Court of Madras, to conduct an enquiry under the said Rules and submit a report to the Government. After conducting the inquiry, the learned Principal Judge, City Civil Court, Chennai has observed in his inquiry report as follows:-