MAYA DWIVEDI Vs. STATE OF M.P.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) CHALLENGE putforth in the present petition is to an order dated 14.8.2008 whereby respondent No. 2 has been appointed as Notary by the State Government.

(2.) THE said appointment has been made on the basis of panel sent by the learned District and Sessions Judge Sidhi, purportedly under Rules, viz., The Notaries Rules, 1956 and in exercise of the powers under Rule 7 thereof.

(3.) THE respondents on their return refute the averments made by the petitioner. It is strenuously contended by the learned Counsel appearing for recommending authority, i.e., District & Sessions Judge, that there being no procedure prescribed under the Rules as to the mode which is required to be adhered to while selecting more suitable candidates for the purpose of appointment of a Notary, and the District and Sessions Judge merely being a recommending authority has discharged his functions as such, under the Rules. It is contended that District & Sessions Judge is not required to hold an examination nor an interview to adjudge the suitability of a person before sending the recommendation to the State Government. It is also contended that the recommending authority after receiving the applications under the Rules has formulated a panel and forwarded the same to the State Government which is an appointing authority under the Act. It is, therefore, contended that, there is no error in adhering to the procedure as has been followed by the District and Sessions Judge in recommending the name for appointment as Notary by sending the panel of eligible persons to the State Government.