M RIZWANULLAH Vs. GOVERNMENT OF ANDHRA PRADESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The action of the Respondents, in refusing to renew the Notary certificate of the Petitioner, is under challenge in this writ petition as arbitrary, illegal and in violation of Articles 14 of the Constitution of India. The Petitioner seeks a consequential direction to renew the Notary certificate as per Section 5(2) of the Notaries Act, 1952.

(2.) The Petitioner, a practicing advocate enrolled in the year 1986, has been practicing at Machilipatnam Courts. His name was brought on the Registrar of Notaries, maintained under Section 5 of the Notaries Act, 1952, in the year 2001 i.e., on 7.6.2001. A certificate of practice was issued to him for a term of three years which was to expire on 7.6.2004. As the said period was coming to an end, the Petitioner claims to have submitted an application on 7.6.2004 seeking renewal for a further period of five years, but to have paid the renewal fee only on 16.6.2004. It is his case that he was suffering from typhoid since 1.6.2004 and, under such circumstances, he could not go to the District Treasury to take out the challan; he had obtained the challan No. 1019 only on 16.6.2004 for Rs. 500/-; on account of his ill-health the delay of ten days had occurred in the deposit of the requisite fee; he had submitted the necessary medical certificate, along with the application, despite which the 2nd Respondent, by its order dated 30.6.2005, had removed his name from the Notaries Register. The Petitioner would contend that he is entitled to be continued for a period of five years as specified in Section 5(1)(b) as amended by Act 36 of 1999 with effect from 17.12.1999. He would also assert that the 1st Respondent had received a favourable inspection report from his subordinates regarding the Petitioner's credentials, and merely for belated payment, of the prescribed fee, of ten days the Respondents ought not to have rejected his application.

(3.) In the counter-affidavit, the Commissioner and Inspector General of Registration and Stamps would state that the renewal application of the certificate of practice was rejected as per Rule 10(b) of the Notaries Act, 1952; though the last date for submitting the application expired on 7.6.2004, the application was submitted, along with the receipt of challan dated 16.6.2004, and hence there occurred a delay of ten days; the Petitioner's application was received by the 2nd Respondent only on 19.6.2004; and, as per the directions of the 1st Respondent in memo dated 19.5.2005, the 2nd Respondent had taken action to remove the name of the Petitioner from the Register of Notaries.