IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.3203 of 2006 AMBAR NATH SINHA, SON OF SRI SAHDEO PRASAD LAL, RESIDENT SOF VILLAGE AND P.O. SANOKHAR, P.S.- SANHAULLA, DISTRICT- BHAGALPUR. …. PETITIONER. Versus 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR. 2. THE DISTRICT REGISTRAR CUM COLLECTOR, BHAGALPUR. 3. THE DISTRICT SUB-REGISTRAR, SUB-REGISTRY OFFICE, BHAGALPUR. 4. SUB-REGISTRAR, SUB-REGISTRY OFFICE, KAHALGAON, BHAGALPUR. ..RESPONDENTS. ----------- 3. 22.02.2011 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the counsel for the State. 2. Petitioner is a deed writer whose deed writing License No. 2 of 1987, Annexure-1 has not been renewed by the Collector, Bhagalpur as he is not qualified for such renewal in the light of the provisions of Bihar Deed Writers Licensing Rules, 1996 (hereinafter referred to as the Rules). Petitioner filed Registration Case No.102 of 2004-2005 before Collector, Bhagalpur praying inter alia to renew his aforesaid deed writing license. Under orders dated 2.12.2005, Annexure-7, Registration Case No. 102 of 2004-2005 has been rejected for the failure of the petitioner to pursue the said case as also observing that petitioner is not qualified for renewal of his deed writing license as he is not qualified for holding such license in terms of the instructions contained in letter no. 932 dated 2 14.5.2005 which inter alia require that licensee deed writer to be Matriculate and less than 18 years of age. It is submitted on behalf of the petitioner that he was granted deed writing License No. 2 of 1987 copy whereof is contained in Annexure-1 to this application. It is also submitted that when petitioner was granted the deed writing License No.2 of 1987 there was no requirement for the deed writer to be a Matriculate and of less than 18 years of age. Such qualification was introduced for the first time in the Rules which was notified on 13.3.1997. It is also submitted that the qualifications provided for in the Rules shall come into force with effect from 13.3.1997 the date on which the rule was notified and will not cover the earlier license of the petitioner and others similarly situate license. Renewal of the license of the petitioner can be refused only for violating the terms of the license which is incorporated in the license itself. It is further submitted that petitioner never violated any of the terms of his license i.e. License No. 2 of 1987, Annexure-1. 3. Counsel for the State has opposed the submission with reference to the averments made in the counter affidavit and submitted that as the petitioner did not qualify for renewal of license provided for in the Rules Collector, Bhagalpur refused renewal as also 3 dismissed his case under order dated 2.12.2005, Annexure-7. Learned State counsel further submitted that in terms of the provisions of Rule-14 of the Rules petitioner should challenge the order dated 2.12.2005 passed by the Collector, Bhagalpur before the Inspector General Registration. 4. Petitioner was granted deed writing License No.2 of 1987 dated 29.8.1987, Annexure-1, when the Rules were not notified as such in my opinion he is not covered by the Rules. In case petitioner has not violated the terms of his License No.2 of 1987, Annexure-1 the Collector, Bhagalpur is required to renew his aforesaid license without any further loss of time. Petitioner having suffered on account of non renewal of license for over 5 years. I direct the Collector, Bhagalpur to consider and grant renewal of the License No. 2 of 1987, Annexure-1 of the petitioner, as early as possible, in any case, within two months from the date of receipt/production of a copy of this order, provided he has not violated any of the terms of License No.2 of 1987, Annexure-1. Ibrar/- (V.N. Sinha, J.)