The State Government's policy decision to restrict the appointment of notaries public for a maximum period of 6 years was declared unconstitutional and illegal. The court emphasized that the appointment of a notary public is an ancient legal institution closely linked with the legal profession, and the State Government's decision failed to consider the core scheme of the Notaries Act.

Those who ordinarily appear in court for others, are themselves in court now. They complain against an illegality on the part of the Government; on the part of the Law Department of the Government. A legal question is involved concerning a Central enactment. Viewed from another aspect, a larger one of constitutional perspective is also involved in view of a somewhat strange stand taken by the Government

in its counter-affidavit. The petitioners, as hinted earlier, are legal practitioners, Advocates, practicing in different courts, from one end of the State to the other. They had been appointed by the Government, as Notary Public. Most of them have been appointed under the provisions of the Notaries Act, 1952 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'), a comprehensive legislation adopted by the Parliament in the early years of the Republic. The appointment is for a term but is renewable. The statutory requirements for the renewal were complied with by all of them. They were, however, confronted with the policy decision of the State Government. It was through a section officer of the Law Department that this policy decision was conveyed to the court by a counter-affidavit. The stand point of the Government can be exposed to public gaze by extracting the very words:

"The Government thought fit to restrict appointment of any person as a notary for a maximum period of 6 years and accordingly the policy decision was taken that appointment will not be given for more than 2 terms that the said decision being is intended to ensure that application for renewal are dealt with on a uniform basis, without giving room for complaints of discrimination. The reasons for stipulating the maximum period as 6 years, is for giving opportunity to other Advocates who did not have opportunity to get appointment as notary. I submit that the said reason is quite justified."

(It is not necessary to comment on the murderous attitude adopted by the deponent towards an alien language. Many such murders take place every day. Courts do not have time to cast a glance at these heaps of corpses. They have to get on with their work and with the day.)

2. Two con tendons are prominently projected (A) The State Government has no authority to decline a renewal, when a notary who wishes to continue to practice after the expiry of the period, makes an application and pays the prescribed fee. (B) The policy decision indicated in the counter-affidavit is totally arbitrary, irrational and unreasonable and liable to be struck down.

3. An examination of these rival contentions would justify a recapitulation of the history of the institution of the notary public.

4. India imported this legal institution (like many other images of Anglo-Saxon jurisprudence) from the English Law. England had its intimate connection with India, for about three centuries. Industrial Revolution and explosion of commercial activities in that country had their reflections and reactions in territories then treated as part of the empire. Notary public was referred to in the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, by its definition - an inclusive definition - in S.3 of the Act reading:

"Notary public includes also any person appointed by the Governor-General in Council to perform the functions of a notary public under this Act."

A broad view of the past history of the English Law on Notaries could in a sense be useful and helpful. A noted text book on that topic is Brooke's 'Notary Public'. A handy information on the history and working of that institution as it now obtains is available in pages 85 to 97, paragraphs 201 to 300 of the Halsbury's Law of England, Fourth Edition, Volume 34. In the first edition of that classical work on Negotiable Instruments Act by Bhashyam and Adiga, a short but succinct narrative is given on notary public. The ancient character of the institution as it existed in England, and its original ecclesiastical nature, and even the continued role of Archbishop of Canterbury in effe