Dr. T.N. Singh, J.-l. Petitioner in person.

2. Petitioner has appeared in person and has placed before us the relevant statutory provisions to assail the validity of Annexure P-2 (1).

3. On 24th September 1987 the Registrar of this Court had issued a "Memorandum" to all District and Sessions Judges within the jurisdiction of this Court dealing with the subject of administration of oath by Oath Commissioners to deponents. In para 2 of that "Memorandum" occur Clauses (iii) and (iv) as respects field of entitlement of Oath Commissioners of swearing affidavits. We extract them:

(iii) in High Court of Madhya Pradesh with reference to Rule 1, Chapter III, under the Madhya Pradesh High Court Manual;

(iv) in supreme Court pursuant to authority, if any, issued under Rule 7 of Order XI of the Supreme Court Rules, 1966.”

4. Petitioner's submission is that the provisions afore-extracted are ultra vires the Rules framed by this Court under section 139 C.P.C. which are called "Commissioner of Oath's Rules, 1976", He has relied on Rules 2 (b), 5 and 34 of the said Rules. According to Rule 5 the jurisdiction of Commissioner of Oaths is meant to be used for verifying affidavits to be used in "Court