NITYANANDA BEHERA Vs. STATE OF ORISSA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The decision of the State Government in the Law Department not to renew the Notarial Certificate of Practice of the petitioner, with effect from 16.7.1998, is under challenge in the present writ petition.

(2.) The case of the petitioner, as detailed in the writ petition, is that he enrolled as an advocate under the State Bar Council in the year 1972 and started practice at Baripada. On completing more than ten years of active practice as an advocate, the petitioner made an application in the prescribed form accompanied by requisite fees, for being appointed as a Notary. The State Government appointed the petitioner as a Notary, for a period of three years, with effect from 16.7.1983, as per the Notarial Certificate of Practice dated 16.7.1983 (Annexure-1). The said Notarial Certificate of Practice was renewed from time to time, authorising the petitioner to practice as a Notary.

(3.) In the year 1998, the petitioner applied for renewal of his Notarial Certificate of Practice and accordingly submitted application with requisite fees. While the renewal was pending, the petitioner was served with a show cause notice from the State Government in the Law Department dated 08.01.1998, on various false allegations of misconduct, which were on the basis of anonymous letters purported to have been received from some persons. The petitioner filed his reply to the said show cause notice. The State Government thereafter initiated suo motu enquiry and after completion of such enquiry, the State Government in the Law Department, considering the nature and gravity of the misconduct, vide its letter dated 22.6.2004 (Annexure-5), warned the petitioner to be careful in future for his misconduct, as per Section 13(12)(b)(iii) of the Notaries Rules, 1956, (hereinafter referred to as the 'Rules').