—\ IN THE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR PETITIONER —-——-\ Jagdish Prasad gupta, aged about Qglyears, S /o. Late Shri Rampratap G/ ,7 Gupta, Dhamtari, Advocate, District R/o Dhamtari Resaipara (C.G.) VERSUS State of Chhattisgarh Through Secretary (,9 $ m Law Department, a? RESPONDENT ( MM} ”V‘ 9 ' f f] D.K.S. . Bhawan, Mantralaya, Qt j} Ralpur (C.G.) ‘ N CONSTITUTION OF INDIA int? V . WW ' wfigasl XI—HC—22 ‘ p‘w a1 zoo WW§WEW %a¥%¥r3n%$! 29.7.2005 Shri C.H. Ramu S pgtitioner. Shri Y.S. Thakur, Gd Vt. Advocate for the State. The pctitioner has under Article 226 of the C The case of the peti1 Public Notarv for 10. 12.1990 and thereafte‘ Public Notarv has been 1': there is no complaint agai working as Public Notary‘ has applied for renewal t not renewed, then again has applied‘for renewal oi refused and the petitiom refusal /011 154 12.2003 vid office of the District 85 Se: as Counsel for the peti the petitioner is squarely Court dated 24.3.2005 between Chandra Prakas others 6r, other conne'oted to have renewed the Ct practice as Public Nota: leanred Govt.Advocate for counsel for the atyanarayan, preferred this writ petition ons titution of India. :ioner is that he was appointed Civil District Dhamtari on r, his certificate to practice as lenewed from time to time and inst the petitioner while he was . On 1.10.1999 the petitioner >f his certificate but same was in the‘year 200‘; the petitioner 'his certificate but again it was :r was communicated the said e Annexure Pd issued from the ;sions Judge, Raipur. tioner submits that the case of covered by the decision of this passed in h Sharma Vs. State of C.G. 8a matters and respondent ought :‘rtificate ofithe petitioner to ry, which‘isiiiot disputed by the State. t W.P.N0.3247/03 XI—HC-22 mw,m,m mmwQmeg} (M my W mm$r WW §FRI0EE§H Wmmw WWPWQEW ‘ ‘ aawm Having heard 16a1‘ncd counsel for the parti6s and the facts and Circumstances of the case, the' having rsgard to ' respondent 1's dlrected to consider the application ofrthe Notary. a “eshan the light of the above orde1 passed by thls NCourt "were ' With the direction aforesaid, the petition stands dispose'diaof. Consequently, I.A. No.2339/O4 also stand disposed of. Certified copy as per rules. Sdl- L.C. Bhadoo Judge “.ttl‘wWKiiY' 1h u