IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.16716 of 2009 1. SURENDRA KUMAR SINGH @ SURENDRA KUMAR SINHA S/O BALDEO SINGH R/O VILL.- BHUALPUR, P.S.- BUNIYADGANJ, DISTT.- GAYA Versus 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR THROUGH THE COMMISSIONER AND SECRETARY, HUMAN RESOURCES DEVELOPMENT, GOVT. OF BIHAR, PATNA 2. THE INSPECTOR GENERAL OF REGISTRATION, BIHAR, NEW SECRETARIATE, BIHAR, PATNA 3. THE DISTRICT REGISTRAR-CUM-COLLECTOR, GAYA, DISTT.- GAYA 4. THE DISTRICT SUB-REGISTRAR, GAYA, DISTT.- GAYA ----------- 2 20.4.2010 Petitioner is aggrieved by the order of the District Sub- Registrar, Gaya, as affirmed by the I.G. Registration, Bihar,Patna by which his deed writer licence was refused to be renewed and that order has been affirmed in appeal. Apparently, the petitioner had applied for renewal of his deed writer licence in the year 2008-09 upon a delay of less than a month, the fee payment etc. are accepted. He then applied for renewal in the year 2009-10, which was well within the time and the same was also accepted. In 2009 by the impugned order dated 20 .6.2009 the District Sub- Registrar, Gaya has refused renewal of the licence of the petitioner on the ground that in the year 2008 he had submitted renewal fee late , which order has not been interfered with in appeal. Having heard the parties and with their consent, the writ application is being disposed of at this stage itself. Having considered the matter, in my view, the two orders impugned have to be quashed and the writ petition has to be allowed. - 2 - The first thing I would like to point out that even though the authority had power to penalize another, penalty would not be imposed merely because it is lawful to do so. There is no hard and fast rule that under no circumstances renewal fee would be accepted after 31st March. The authorities must keep in mind that this is a licence to carry profession of livelihood purpose and cannot be treated so casually by statutory authority. The authorities themselves have taken more than a year to wake up. For delayed payment of renewal fee, which was made in April, 2008, notices were issued in April, 2009, after one year but for a few days’ delay ( less than a month) the petitioner’s livelihood is being snatched away, which authorities are totally oblivious of. I, therefore, set aside the order impugned and direct that renewal be accordingly granted to the petitioner. The writ petition is thus allowed. singh (Navaniti Prasad Singh,J)