Allowed

A.Krishna Raju v. State of Ap,Prl.Scy,Revenue,Hyd,and 3

Andhra Pradesh HC15 Dec 2022WP/30063/2016

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This common order disposed of multiple writ petitions challenging the government Memo No.31617/Regn.II/A1/2012-4 dated 31.08.2015, which refused renewal of Notary Certificates. Relying on W.P. No.9655 of 2016 and Tarun Mehta, the court held renewal is rule and rejection is exception, allowing the writs and setting aside the Memo.

What did the court decide?

Impugned Memo No.31617/Regn.II/A1/2012-4 dated 31.08.2015 set aside; writ petitions allowed; pending miscellaneous applications closed.

A.Krishna Raju Vs State of Ap,Prl.Scy,Revenue,H… — Service and Employment | Andhra Pradesh HC (2022)

¶1

HON’BLE SMT. JUSTICE V. SUJATHA

¶2

WRIT PETITION NOs.13837, 28973, 29922, 30063, 30496, 30592, 30622, 23387, 31025, 31969, 32139, 32775, 35898, 37377 & 13376 of 2016.

¶3

COMMON ORDER:

¶4

W.P. No.13837 of 2016:

¶5

This writ petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking following relief:

¶6

“…to issue writ or direction more particularly one in the nature of writ of mandamus, declaring the action of the respondents No.1 and 2 in issuing Memo No.31617/Regn.II/A1/2012-4, dt. 31.08.2015, issued by the respondent No.1 and Memo No.NR/3567/2015, dt. 15.09.2015, by the respondent No.2 as illegal, arbitrary and violative of Article 19(1)(g) of the constitution of India and contrary to the provision of Notaries Act and Rules in the interest of justice…”

¶7

W.P. No.28973 of 2016:

¶8

This writ petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking following relief:

¶9

“…to issue an order, direction or writ more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus, declaring the inaction of the respondents particularly the 4^th respondent in not renewing the petitioners Notary certificate pursuant to his application dated 02.04.2016, as arbitrary, illegal, contrary to law and law laid down by the Apex court and consequently to direct the respondents to renew the Notary Certificate of the petitioner which is mandatory as per law and to pass…”

¶10

W.P. No.29922 of 2016:

¶11

This writ petition is filed under Article 226 of the

¶12

Constitution of India seeking following relief:

¶13

“…to issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ or direction declaring the proceedings of the 1^st respondent issued in Memo No.31617/Regn.II/A1/2012-4, dt. 31.8.2015 as illegal, arbitrary and violative of Article 19(1)(g) of the Constitution of India and contrary to the provision of Notaries Act and Rules…”

¶14

W.P. No.30063 of 2016:

¶15

This writ petition is filed under Article 226 of the

¶16

Constitution of India seeking following relief:

¶17

“…to issue an order, direction or writ more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus, declaring the inaction of the respondents particularly the 4^th respondent in not renewing the petitioners Notary certificate pursuant to his application dated 18.7.2016 as arbitrary, illegal, contrary to law and law laid down by the Apex court and consequently to direct the respondents to renew the Notary Certificate of the petitioner which is mandatory as per law…”

¶18

W.P. No.30496 of 2016:

¶19

This writ petition is filed under Article 226 of the

¶20

Constitution of India seeking following relief:

¶21

“…issue a Writ, Order or Direction more particularly one in the nature of a Writ of MANDAMUS, declaring the proceedings in Memo No.31617/Regn.II/A1/2012-4 dated 31.08.2015 issued by the respondent No.1 as illegal, arbitrary and in violation of Article 19(1)(g) of the Constitution of India and contrary to the

¶22

provisions of Notaries Act and Rules and pass such other order or orders as this Hon’ble Court may deem fit and proper in the interest of justice…”

¶23

W.P. No.30592 of 2016:

¶24

This writ petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking following relief:

¶25

“…to issue an appropriate writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring Memo No.31617/Regn.II/A1/2012-4, dated 31.8.2015, issued by the respondent No.1 as arbitrary, illegal and contrary to the provisions of the Notaries Act, 1952 and the Notaries Rules, 1956 and violative of the fundamental rights guaranteed to the petitioners under Articles 14, 19(1)(g) and 21 of the Constitution of India and consequently direct the respondent No.2 to renew the Certificates of Practice of the petitioners by setting aside the Memo No.31617/Regn.II/A1/2012-4 dated 31.8.2015 and pass…”

¶26

W.P. No.30622 of 2016:

¶27

This writ petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking following relief:

¶28

“…issue a Writ, One in the nature of a Writ of Mandamus or any other appropriate Wirt, Direction or Order declaring the proceedings issued by the 1^st respondent issued vide Memo No.31617/Regn.II/A1/2012-4 dt 31.8.2015 as illegal, arbitrary and violative of Article 19(1)(g) of the Constitution of India and contrary to the provision of Notaries Act and Rules and consequently set aside the same by directing the respondents to renew the notary license of the petitioner and pass such other order or orders as are deemed fit and proper…”

¶29

W.P. No.23387 of 2016:

¶30

This writ petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking following relief:

¶31

“…to issue a Writ, One in the nature of a Writ of Mandamus or any other appropriate Wirt, Direction or Order declaring the proceedings issued by the 1^st respondent issued vide Memo No.31617/Regn.II/A1/2012-4 dt. 31.8.2015 as illegal, arbitrary and violative of Article 19(1)(g)

¶32

of the Constitution of India and contrary to the provision of Notaries Act and Rules and consequently set aside the same by directing the respondents to renew the notary license of the petitioner…”

¶33

W.P. No.31025 of 2016:

¶34

This writ petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking following relief:

¶35

“…to issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ or direction declaring the inaction of the respondents particularly the 2^nd respondent in not renewing the petitioners Notary certificate pursuant to his application along with chalan dated 10.06.2016 as arbitrary, illegal, contrary to law and law laid down by the Apex Court and consequently to direct the respondents to renew the Notary certificate of the petitioner which is mandatory as per law…”

¶36

W.P. No.31969 of 2016:

¶37

This writ petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking following relief:

¶38

“…to issue an order, direction or writ more particularly one in the nature of Writ of

¶39

Mandamus, declaring the inaction of the respondents particularly the 4^th respondent in not renewing the petitioner’s Notary certificate pursuant to his application dated 16.7.2016 as arbitrary, illegal, contrary to law and law laid down by the Apex court and consequently to direct the respondents to renew the Notary Certificate of the petitioner which is mandatory as per law and to pass…”

¶40

W.P. No.32139 of 2016:

¶41

This writ petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking following relief:

¶42

“…to issue an appropriate Writ, Order or Direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus, declaring the impugned Memo by the 1^st respondent vide No.31617/Regn.II/A1/2012-4 dt.31.8.2015, refusing to renew the Notary as being illegal, arbitrary, contrary to the provisions of Notaries Act and rules and in violation of Article 19(1)(g) of the Constitution of India and consequently set aside the same by directing the respondents to renew the notary license of the petitioner…”

¶43

W.P. No.32775 of 2016:

¶44

This writ petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking following relief:

¶45

“…to issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ or direction declaring the proceedings of the 1^st respondent issued in Memo No.31617/Regn.II/Al/2012-4, dt. 31.8.2015 as illegal, arbitrary and violative of Article 19(1)(g) of the Constitution of India and contrary to the provision of Notaries Act and Rules and consequently direct the 2^nd respondent to renew the certificates of the petitioners and pass…”

¶46

W.P. No.35898 of 2016:

¶47

This writ petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking following relief:

¶48

“…to issue a Writ, Order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus, declaring the action of the Respondent No.1 issued in memo No.31617/Regn.II/A1/2012-4 dated 31.08.2015, as illegal, arbitrary and violation of Article 19(1)(g) of the Constitution of India and Contrary to the Provision of Notaries Act and Rules, consequently, direct the Respondent No.2 to

¶49

renew the application of the petitioner certificate of practice without reference to Memo No.31617/Regn.II/A1/2012-4, dated 31.08.2015…”

¶50

W.P. No.37377 of 2016:

¶51

This writ petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking following relief:

¶52

“…to issue a writ of Mandamus or any other appropriate Writ or direction declaring the proceedings of the 1^st Respondent issued in Memo No.31617/Regn.II/A1/2012-4, dt. 31.08.2015, as illegal, arbitrary and violation of Article 19(1)(g) of the Constitution of India and contrary to the provision of Notaries Act and Rules and pass such other or further orders as the Hon’ble Court feels deem fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case…”

¶53

W.P. No.13376 of 2016:

¶54

This writ petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking following relief:

¶55

“…to issue a writ, Order or orders more particularly in the nature of the Writ of

¶56

Mandamus, call for the entire record leading upto impugned orders vide letter No.G2/228/2016 dated 11.04.2016 of the 3^rd Respondent herein refusing the 1^st renewal of the petitioners Notary Certificate is arbitray, contrary to law and law laid down by the apex court and further prayed that this Hon’ble court may be pleased to direct the respondents to renewal the Notary Certificate of the petitioner as 1^st renewal which is mandatory as per law

¶57

being 1^st renewal…”

¶58

As the issue involved in all these cases is challenging the Memo No.31617/Regn.II/A1/2012-4, dated 31.08.2015, basing on which the applications for renewal to practice as notary was rejected by the Chief Secretary to Government, the said writ petitions are decided by way of a common order.

¶59

Today, when the matter came up for hearing, learned Government Pleader for Revenue on instructions submits that all these cases are related to renewal of petitioner’s Notary Certificate and had produced a copy of this Court’s Judgment in W.P. No.9655 of 2016 and batch, dated 02.12.2016, wherein this Court

¶60

under similar circumstances had allowed the writ petition relying upon identical case, which was considered before the Hon’ble Rajasthan High Court in Tarun Mehta and others v. State of Rajasthan and others¹ , wherein the Court held as under:

¶61

“….the entitlement of a person appointed as a notary public once registered as such was automatic on making an application and payment of fee. It is true that after the amendment introduced as aforesaid, a discretion is vested with the State Government to grant the renewal or refuse it. But then, such discretion vested is not absolute and the same has to be exercised judicially. In considered opinion of this Court, having regard to the scheme of the act, even after the amendment introduced as aforesaid, the grant of renewal of the licence for authorization is a rule and the rejection an exception. Therefore, ordinarily, if there is nothing adverse against the person seeking renewal of the certificate of authorization to practice as notary then the same would not be refused.”

¶62

3. From the above, it is clear that until and unless there exists a valid reason for rejection, the renewal is automatic on making an application and on payment of fee. Even otherwise, if an application made for renewal is sought to be rejected, a notice is

¶63

1 AIR 2010 Rajasthan 106

¶64

essential to be issued to the aggrieved person for giving him an opportunity to submit explanation.

¶65

In view of the fact that the issue involved in these cases is already decided by this Court in W.P. No.9655 of 2016 and batch by an order dated 02.12.2016, this Court feels it appropriate to allow these writ petitions by setting aside the impugned Memo No.31617/Regn.II/A1/2012-4, dated 31.08.2015, which is the basis for rejecting the renewal of the Notary Certificate.

¶66