IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.SIRI JAGAN THURSDAY, THE 7TH AUGUST 2008 / 16TH SRAVANA 1930 W.P(C).No. 20146 of 2008(W) -------------------------- PETITIONER: ------------ M.N. MATHEW, ADVOCATE, MATTATTICKAL NINANS, M-3/77, BATHEL,INDIRA NAGAR, KADAVANTHRA P.O., ERNAKULAM, KOCHI 682 020, KERALA. BY ADV. SRI.G.BHAGAVAT SINGH RESPONDENTS: ------------- 1. UNION OF INDIA, REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY (LAW), GOVERNMENT OF INDIA, MINISTRY OF LAW & JUSTICE, DEPARTMENT OF LEGAL AFFAIRS (NOTARY CELL), NEW DELHI 110 001. 2. THE SECRETARY (LAW), GOVERNMENT OF INDIA, MINISTRY OF LAW & JUSTICE , DEPARTMENT OF LEGAL AFFAIRS (NOTARY CELL), NEW DELHI 110 001. BY ADV. SRI.THOMAS J.ANAKKALUKKAL,CGC - R1,R2 THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 07/08/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: scm S.SIRI JAGAN, J ================== W.P(C)No. 20146 of 2008 ================== Dated this the 7th day of August, 2008. J U D G M E N T The petitioner submitted a memorial under the Notaries Act before the 2nd respondent for a Certificate to Practice as a Notary. The petitioner's contention is that although the application was filed as early as in 2003 and the application was received by the 2nd respondent. No steps have been taken to process, the same in accordance with the Notaries Act and Rules. He was served with Ext.P6 communication to the effect that his memorial dated 30.10.2003 is not traceable in the Notary Cell. The petitioner filed an appeal, Ext.P7, which was also rejected by the appellate authority on the same ground. The petitioner therefore seeks the following reliefs: “a) direct the 2nd respondent to reconstruct the Exht.P1 application by using photocopies without losing the priority as per the date of application and initiate preliminary action under Rule 6 and took steps under Rule 7 for appointing the petitioner as “Central Government Notary” for the area specified in Exht.P1 within a time frame; b) declare that the petitioner is eligible and entitled to get priority from the date of Exht.P1 application; c) direct the respondents to defer all further W.P(C)No. 20146 of 2008 - 2 - appointments till the completion of the process of Exht.P1 and the appointment of the petitioner as per Exhibit.P1;” 2. I have heard the learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the respondents. 3. I have granted the Central Government Counsel, several opportunities to get instructions. On 29.7.2008, I passed the following order: “ Post after a week. The Counsel for the Central Government shall positively get instructions by that time, failing which appropriate orders would be passed on the assumption that the respondents have no objection in allowing the writ petition. Hand over a copy of the order to the Central Government Counsel.” 4. In respect of the same, the Central Government Counsel has not been able to get instructions from the respondents. In the above circumstances, I am disposing of the writ petition on the basis of the averments in the writ petition. 5. As is clear from Exts.P6 to P8 there is no dispute regarding the fact that the memorial submitted by the petitioner has been received in the office of the 2nd respondent. The only contention is that it is not traceable. It should be noted that the memorial is not a mere application. Filing of a memorial the cumbersome process of getting the same signed by five persons W.P(C)No. 20146 of 2008 - 3 - mentioned in the Act and Rules which includes Magistrate, Banker etc. I do not think that for the fault of the 2nd respondent's office, the petitioner should be asked to go through that cumbersome process again, in so far as, the respondents do not dispute the receipt of the memorial. 6. In the above circumstances, I direct the 2nd respondent to proceed with a processing of the petitioner's application on the basis of Ext.P1 copy of the memorial produced by the petitioner along with this writ petition and pass appropriate orders thereon in accordance with law as per the Notaries Act and Rules. Orders in this regard shall be passed, as expeditiously as possible, at any rate, within two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. The petitioner shall forward a copy of the writ petition to the 2nd respondent along with a certified copy of this judgment for compliance. S.SIRI JAGAN, JUDGE rhs