Back
2023 Supreme(P&H) 3019
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
VINOD S. BHARDWAJ, J.
Raghbir Singh Toor – Petitioner
Versus
Union of India & Ors. – Respondents
CWP NO. 7194 of 2019 (O&M)
Decided On : 17-01-2023
Ms. Arshdeep Kaur, Advocate; For the Petitioner
Mr. Abhimanyu Antil, Advocate, for the respondents/UOI.
Headnote:(A) Notaries Rules, 1956 - Rule 8B - Renewal of Certificate of Practice - Petitioner, a Notary Public, challenged rejection of renewal application due to delay caused by family health issues - Respondents failed to consider mitigating circumstances for delay - Application should not be construed to strictly penalize applicants when justifiable reasons exist - The authority must exercise discretion to avoid injustice. (Paras 4, 10, 12, 14)
(B) Judicial Discretion - Powers of relaxation conferred on authorities under the rules must be exercised reasonably and humanely to ensure that procedural technicalities do not result in injustice. (Paras 12, 14)
Facts of the case:
The petitioner, a Notary Public since 1989, applied for renewal of his certificate approximately three weeks before its expiration, explaining delays due to health issues affecting him and his family. Despite this, the application was rejected for being submitted after the deadline.
Findings of Court:
The court found that the impugned order did not consider the reasons for delay or provide an adequate explanation for its rejection, indicating a mechanical application of rules without the necessary discretion.
Issues: Whether the reasons for delay provided by the petitioner warrant relaxation under the rules and whether the respondent's decision was justifiable.
Ratio Decidendi: The court emphasized the need for the respondent authority to apply discretion in a humane and practical manner, considering genuine difficulties presented by the petitioner, and set aside the prior order due to lack of such consideration.
Result: Petition allowed. The matter is remitted to the respondent to reconsider the application.
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. challenge to order of renewal application delay. (Para 1 , 2 , 3) |
| 2. arguments regarding application submission and delays. (Para 4 , 5 , 6) |
| 3. court's observations on uncontroverted facts. (Para 7 , 8 , 9) |
| 4. analysis on discretion and human approach in decision-making. (Para 10 , 11 , 12 , 13 , 14) |
| 5. conclusion remitting case for fresh consideration. (Para 15) |
JUDGMENT
Vinod S. Bhardwaj, J. (Oral)
The instant writ petition raises a challenge to the order dated 13.02.2018 (Annexure P-10) passed by the respondents.
2. Briefly summarized, the case of the petitioner who is practicing as a Notary Public since 1989 at Judicial Court Complex, Jagraon, is that he was granted a license to practice as Notary Public in the year 2000 vide Certificate of Practice dated 07.03.2000 and the same was valid upto 07.03.2015. The petitioner claims to have moved an application for seeking renewal of the aforesaid certificate on 12.02.2015 i.e. about three weeks prior to its expiry along with the requisite fee. A letter was thereafter received by the petitioner on 14.05.2015 from respondent No.3 vide which the petitioner was asked to furnish certain documents which was also complied by the petitioner. A letter was again received by the petitioner pointing out certain fresh objections regarding the renewal of Certificate of Practice as a Notary Public.
3. Reply to the above said objections was also submitted by the petitioner on 22.05.2015. As there was a delay of 127 days in submission for the application for renewal of the Certificate of Practice as Notary Public as per the procedure, the petitioner submitted the detailed reasons for the said delay pointing out that his wife had been suffering from Rheumatoid Arthritis for a long period and that even the petitioner was diagnosed with Bone Marrow Cancer. The family circumstances i.e. the health of his wife and also the failing health of the petitioner constantly delayed timely submission of the application for seeking renewal of the Certificate of Practice as Notary Public. The respondents had also referred to provisions of Rule 8B of the NOTARIES RULES , 1956, as amended vide the Notaries Amendment Rules 2014 whereby the Government after considering the reason stated in the application can relax the provisions of the rules. The petitioner was called upon to submit the relevant supporting documents setting out reasons for the delay since the rules require submission of application for renewal six months before its expiry. Along with furnishing requisite documents in support of the reasons for the delay, the petitioner also deposited an additional fee towards condonation of delay for seeking relaxation in delayed submission of the application for seeking renewal of Certificate of Practice as Notary Public. However, the application was rejected by the respondents vide order dated 13.02.2018 (Annexure P-10) on the ground of it having been submitted after expiry of validity period and after a period of 06 months and 03 days.
4. Written statement has been filed by the respondents wherein they have reiterated the said factual aspect and have contended that as per Rule 8B of the NOTARIES RULES , 1956, an application for renewal of Certificate of Practice as Notary Public was required to be submitted to the appropriate Government before six months from the date of expiry of its period of validity. Since the Certificate of Practice as Notary Public of the petitioner was valid upto 07.03.2015 and the application dated 12.02.2015 was received by the Ministry on 09.03.2015, hence the same was delayed. The petitioner having not fulfilled the requirements within the time frame, the same has validly not been renewed.
5. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner contends that the application form specifically stipulates a column for a delayed submission of an application, thus providing an opportunity to an applicant to submit the reasons for delay in submission of the application. Fur
