CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO.10669 OF 2011 :{ 1 }: IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH DATE OF DECISION: JUNE 03, 2011 Harjesh Kumar .....Petitioner VERSUS Union of India, New Delhi and another ....Respondents CORAM:- HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE RANJIT SINGH 1. Whether Reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgement? 2. To be referred to the Reporters or not? 3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest? PRESENT: Mr. Sanjeev Sharma, Advocate, for the petitioner. **** RANJIT SINGH, J. The petitioner had submitted an application for appointment as a Notary in the year 2008. Certain objections were raised, which were removed in January 2009. No decision was taken. Now a communication is received by the petitioner in January 2011, requiring him to submit a fresh application under amended Rules. The petitioner has filed this writ petition to direct the respondents to consider his application under unamended rules. The submission is that action of the respondents in considering the application of the petitioner under amended rules CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO.10669 OF 2011 :{ 2 }: would lead to retrospective application of the amended rules, which can not be permitted. The submission appears to be totally misconceived. Asking the petitioner to submit an application as per the amended rules, which are introduced during the pendency of the application submitted by the petitioner, would not mean that the rules are being applied retrospectively. The application of the petitioner was under consideration, when the amendment has been effected in the rules. Any decision has to be now regulated by the amended rules. No right had accrued to the petitioner for appointment as a Notary during the pendency of his application. The petitioner had earlier been asked to remove certain defects in the application. The present application submitted under unamended rules would also need rectification in terms of the amended rules. This is the effect of asking the petitioner to submit a fresh application as per the amended rules. There is no cause made out for the petitioner to approach this Court by way of writ petition. The writ petition is apparently misconceived. The petitioner has to apply under the rules, which are relevant and has application on the date of the consideration and order. The writ petition is without any merit and is, therefore, dismissed. June 03, 2011 ( RANJIT SINGH ) khurmi JUDGE