.••''/D ^y'r^\'ft' 21MiR3 F t*F*'"''i<8 131'tSLt: Ofc.'ia.^T f •l00'- ^>....--^>'.^^ ^p' • ^ LtN'THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BILASPUR CHHATTISGARH Writ Petition. N0. 3 Y200£ prrmoNER ^ /' SANTOSH CHANO PARAKH, S/o Maal Chand ji Parakh, aged about 65 years, resident of Station Road, Balod, Dis- trict Durg, Chhattisgarh. VERSUS 1. STATE OF CHHATTESGARH, Through Secretary, Law Depart- ment Offlce situated at Secretariate Ralpur, Chhattisgarh. / 2. Secretary, Lawand l-egislatlve Department, OfRce $ituated at Secretariate, Raipur, Chhattisgar WRIT PETmON UNDER ARTICLE 226 / 227 OF THE .CONSTTTUTION OF INDIA FOR ISSUANCE OF A WRIT IN TME NATURE OF MANDAMUS/PROHIBmON/CERTIORARI/ DIRECnON/DIRECnONS.ORDER/ORDERS. RESPONDENTS ^7< ^ty^ ^'"^^ HLGH^OURT OF JUDJCATURE CHHATTISGARH : BtLASPUR SINGLE BENCH : HON'BLE SHRI S.R. NAYAK, CJ. WRIT PETITION N0. 31 OF 2006 PETiTIONER Santosh Chand Parakh, S/o Maal Chand ji Parakh, Aged about 65 years, resident of Station Road, Balod, District Durg, Chhattisgarh Vs. RESPQNDENTS 1. State of Chhattisgarh, Through Secretary, Law Department Oifice situated at Secretariate Raipur, Chhattisgarh 2. Secretary, Law and Legislative Department, Offics situated at Secretariate, Raipur, Chhattisgarh Present: Mr.N.S. Dhurandhar, learned counsel for the petltioner. Mr. Yashwant Singh, learned Govt. Advocate forthe State. ORAL ORDER (Passed one1" January, 2006) ) The petitioner is an Advocate and he wa3 appointed as Notary at Balod and his term of appointment came to an end on 15-11-2005. Even before the expiry of the term of his appointment, the petitioner made an application before the respondents on 24-08-2005 vide Annexure - A/3 and sent his application by reflistered post. That appiication for renewal of the certificate of Notary was summarily rejected by the second respondent, Secretary, Law and Legislative Department, State of Chhattisgarh by the impugnect order dated 16-12-2005 (Annexure A/1). The order is bereft of any reason. !t ateo does not disclose that what weighed with the sscond respondent to rsject the application. In that view 31 2- of the matter, 1 think that ends of justice would be met by directing the second respondent to reconsider the application of the petitioner for renewal of the certificate of Notary and dispose of the same within a time- Trame. (2) In the result, the v/rit petition is aliowed. The impugned order is set-aside and a direction shall issue to the second respondent to reconsider the application of the petitioner (Annexure-A/3) dated 24-08- 2005 for renewal of the certificate of Notary and pass appropriate order as expeditiously as possible, at any rate, within a period of one month from the date of receipt of a copy or" thi's order. No costs. Sd/- S.R.Nayak Chief Justice yy