2025:CGHC:42930 AFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPC No. 3418 of 2022 Dhaniram Yadav S/o Shri Shivnarayan Yadav Aged About 58 Years R/o Ring Road, Ambikapur, District Ambikapur, Surguja, Chhattisgarh.

... Petitioner(s)

versus

1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through Secretary, Law And Legislative Affairs Department, Mahanadi Bhawan, Mantralaya, Capital Complex, Atal Nagar, Nawa Raipur, District Raipur, Chhattisgarh. 2 - Deputy Secretary State Of Chhattisgarh, Law And Legislative Affairs Department, Mahanadi Bhawan, Mantralaya, Capital Complex, Atal Nagar, Nawa Raipur, District Raipur, Chhattisgarh.

... Respondent(s)

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

For Petitioner : Mr. Manoj Paranjpe, Sr. Advocate with Mr. Rishab Gupta, Advocate.

For Respondent-State : Ms. Upasana Mehta, Dy. GA.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Hon'ble Shri Arvind Kumar Verma, Judge

Order on Board

25.08.2025

1. Petitioner has filed this writ petition with following reliefs:

“Relief Sought:

1. That, this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to issue writ/writs, order/orders, direction/directions, quashing the impugned order dated 14.07.2022 (Annex.P/1), passed by the Deputy Secretary, Law and Legislative Department and the authorities may kindly be directed to reconsider the case of the petitioner for renewal and they may further be directed to restore his name in the register maintained by the government med under Section 4 of the Notaries Act, 1952.

2. That, this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to grant any other relief(s), which is deemed fit and proper in the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case.”

2. Relevant facts of this case are that the petitioner is a practicing Advocate, he has been appointed as ‘Notary’ at District -Ambikapur Surguja (C.G.). By the Department of Law & Legislative Affairs necessary certificate was issued in favour of the petitioner on 11.07.2005 for a period of ‘5 years’ and upon completion of 5 years, his certificate was renewed from time to time for further period of 5 years, however, vide order dated 14.07.2022, State Government has decided not to renew the notary certificate of the petitioner and, thereafter, striking of his name from the register of Notary. Hence, this writ petition.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner contended that State Government while passing the impugned order Annexure P-1 neither assign any reasons nor afforded any opportunity of hearing to the petitioner and also ignored the provisions of Section 5 of the Notaries Act, 1952 as also the Rule 13(4-a) of the Notaries Rules, 1956. The allegations contained in notice dated 04.10.2021 is the foundation of refusal to renew the certificate of petitioner, however, neither any enquiry has been conducted with regard to said allegation nor the prescribed procedure has been followed as envisaged under the Rule 13 of the Notaries Rules, 1956. Before expiry of the license, petitioner has filed an application Annexure P-6 for renewal of the certificate of Notary before the competent Authority, which is pending for consideration yet. Hence, petitioner has came-up before this Court with aforesaid prayer. In support of his contention, he places reliance upon decisions/orders dated 09.10.2023 & 17.03.2025 passed by this Court in WPC No.3066/2022 & WPC No.4604/2024.

4. Learned State Counsel opposes the submission of counsel for the petitioner and would submit that the respondent-authority has passed the impugned order Annexure P-1 after taking into consideration the entire facts of the case. She further contended that application/representation made by the petitioner for renewal of the license was rejected by the authorities strictly in accordance with law.

Hence, present writ petition deserves to be dismissed.

5. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the material available on record.

6. For ready reference, Section 10 of the Notaries Act, 1